Accuracy of physician self‐estimation of time spent during patient care in the emergency department

Author:

Reznek Martin A.12,Mangolds Virginia1,Kotkowski Kevin A.12,Samadian Kian D.3,Joseph James4,Larkin Celine1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine UMass Chan Medical School Worcester Massachusetts USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine UMass Memorial Health Worcester Massachusetts USA

3. Department of Emergency Medicine Massachusetts General Hospital & Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

4. Department of Emergency Medicine Alpert Medical School of Brown University Providence Rhode Island USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveAccurate measurement of physicians’ time spent during patient care stands to inform emergency department (ED) improvement efforts. Direct observation is time consuming and cost prohibitive, so we sought to determine if physician self‐estimation of time spent during patient care was accurate.MethodsWe performed a prospective, convenience‐sample study in which research assistants measured time spent by ED physicians in patient care. At the conclusion of each observed encounter, physicians estimated their time spent. Using Mann–Whitney U tests and Spearman's rho, we compared physician estimates to actual time spent and assessed for associations of encounter characteristics and physician estimation.ResultsAmong 214 encounters across 10 physicians, we observed a medium‐sized correlation between actual and estimated time (Spearman's rho = 0.63, p < 0.001), and in aggregate, physicians underestimated time spent by a median of 0.1 min. An equal number of encounters were overestimated and underestimated. Underestimated encounters were underestimated by a median of 5.1 min (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5–9.8) and overestimated encounters were overestimated by a median of 4.3 min (IQR 2.5–11.6)—26.3% and 27.9% discrepancy, respectively. In terms of actual time spent, underestimated encounters (median 19.3 min, IQR 13.5–28.3) were significantly longer than overestimated encounters (median 15.3 min, IQR 11.3–20.5) (p < 0.001).ConclusionsPhysician self‐estimation of time spent was accurate in aggregate, providing evidence that it is a valid surrogate marker for larger‐scale process improvement and research activities, but likely not at the encounter level. Investigations exploring mechanisms to augment physician self‐estimation, including modeling and technological support, may yield pathways to make self‐estimation valid also at the encounter level.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Emergency Medicine

Reference12 articles.

1. Development and validation of a time and motion tool to measure cardiology acute care nurse practitioner activities;Kilpatrick K;Can J Cardiovasc Nurs,2011

2. A Comparison of Four Approaches for Measuring Clinician Time Use

3. Systematic review of time studies evaluating physicians in the hospital setting

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3