Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChopra, V
dc.contributor.authorHarrod, M
dc.contributor.authorWinter, S
dc.contributor.authorForman, J
dc.contributor.authorQuinn, M
dc.contributor.authorKrein, S
dc.contributor.authorFowler, KE
dc.contributor.authorSingh, H
dc.contributor.authorSaint, S
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-19T01:49:05Z
dc.date.available2020-03-19T01:49:05Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1553-5592
dc.identifier.doi10.12788/jhm.2966
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/392451
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Approaches of trainees to diagnosis in teaching hospitals are poorly understood. Identifying cognitive and system-based barriers and facilitators to diagnosis may improve diagnosis in these settings. METHODS: We conducted a focused ethnography of trainees at 2 academic medical centers to understand the barriers and facilitators to diagnosis. Field notes regarding the diagnostic process (eg, information gathering, integration and interpretation, working diagnosis) and the work system (eg, team members, organization, technology and tools, physical environment, tasks) were recorded. Following observations, focus groups and interviews were conducted to understand the viewpoints, problems, and solutions to improve diagnosis. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and May 2016, four teaching teams (4 attendings, 4 senior residents, 9 interns, and 12 medical students) were observed for 168 hours. Observations of diagnosis during care led to identification of the following four key themes: (1) diagnosis is a social phenomenon, (2) data necessary to make diagnoses are fragmented, (3) distractions interfere with the diagnostic process, and (4) time pressures impede diagnostic decision-making. These themes suggest that specific interventions tailored to the academic setting such as team-based discussions of diagnostic workups, scheduling diagnostic time-outs during the day, and strategies to “protect” learners from interruptions might prove to be useful in improving the process of diagnosis. Future studies that implement these ideas (either alone or within a multimodal intervention) appear to be necessary. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis in teaching hospitals is a unique process that requires improvement. Contextual insights gained from this ethnography may be used to inform future interventions.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherFrontline Medical Communications, Inc.
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom668
dc.relation.ispartofpageto672
dc.relation.ispartofissue10
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Hospital Medicine
dc.relation.ispartofvolume13
dc.subject.fieldofresearchClinical Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1103
dc.titleFocused ethnography of diagnosis in academic medical centers
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dcterms.bibliographicCitationChopra, V; Harrod, M; Winter, S; Forman, J; Quinn, M; Krein, S; Fowler, KE; Singh, H; Saint, S, Focused ethnography of diagnosis in academic medical centers, Journal of Hospital Medicine, 2018, 13 (10), pp. 668-672
dc.date.updated2020-03-19T01:47:55Z
gro.rights.copyrightSelf-archiving of the author-manuscript version is not yet supported by this journal. Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version or contact the author[s] for more information.
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorChopra, Vineet


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record