Skip to content

Cognitive Process of Diagnostic Error in Emergency Physicians

Cognitive Process of Diagnostic Error in Emergency Physicians

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04030975
Acronym
diagnosis
Enrollment
30
Registered
2019-07-24
Start date
2014-05-31
Completion date
2015-11-30
Last updated
2019-07-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Thinking

Keywords

diagnostic error

Brief summary

Diagnostic error, Dual process model of reasoning) During the last decade, much emphasis has been placed on system solutions to patient safety problems. However, diagnostic error, despite being responsible for twice as many adverse events as medication error, has received little attention. The rate of diagnostic errors have been estimated to be between 0.6% to 12%.Some estimates are as high as 15%.The rate of negative outcome or adverse effects of diagnostic errors range from 6.9% to 17%. Most authors accept that the dual process model of reasoning explains how clinicians make diagnoses. The purpose of this study is to investigate why diagnostic errors occurred in the emergency departments (EDs).

Detailed description

Diagnostic error, Dual process model of reasoning) During the last decade, much emphasis has been placed on system solutions to patient safety problems. However, diagnostic error, despite being responsible for twice as many adverse events as medication error, has received little attention. The rate of diagnostic errors have been estimated to be between 0.6% to 12%.Some estimates are as high as 15%.The rate of negative outcome or adverse effects of diagnostic errors range from 6.9% to 17%. Most authors accept that the dual process model of reasoning explains how clinicians make diagnoses. The purpose of this study is to investigate why diagnostic errors occurred in the emergency departments (EDs). A qualitative study approach was used with in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with emergency physicians to investigate the cognitive diagnosis process. The study takes place in the EDs of three hospitals in Taiwan. We chose the participants using a purposive sampling technique to yield a sample that would be most likely contribute significant information on the diagnostic process. Sampling continued until novel information was no longer being gathered. All audiotapes were transcribed verbatim. The transcripts are analyzed by two of the investigators based on the ground theory. Once all relevant codes were identified, they were grouped together into meaningful categories. These categories were then grouped under appropriate themes, which were used to generate a theory of diagnostic errors.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Cardinal Tien Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Cathay General Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_ONLY
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* trained emergency physicians

Exclusion criteria

* refused interview

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
generate a theory of diagnostic errorsDec., 2015

Countries

Taiwan

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026