Search

Following a review of accepted submissions for this special issue of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM)'s collected papers on diagnosis, we offer a commentary on the variety of reports. We use the metaphor of Newton's demonstration that a complex percept like the rainbow can be broken down by prisms, into a collection of different wavelengths of light. Like Feynman, we believe that the beauty of something may be revealed and augmented by reducing it to its constituent parts., (© 2025 The Author(s). Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Correct and rapid diagnosis is pivotal to the practice of emergency medicine, yet the chaotic and ill-structured emergency department environment is fertile ground for the commission of diagnostic error. Errors may result from specific error-producing conditions (EPCs) or, more frequently, from an interaction between such conditions. These EPCs are often expedient and serve to shorten the decision making process in a high-pressure environment. Recognizing that they will inevitably exist, it is important for clinicians to understand and manage their dangers. The authors present a case of delayed diagnosis resulting from the interaction of a number of EPCs that produced a "perfect" situation to produce a missed or delayed diagnosis. They offer practical suggestions whereby clinicians may decrease their chances of becoming victims of these influences.

Background: Recent literature describes "cognitive dispositions to respond" (CDRs) that may lead physicians to err in their clinical reasoning., Objectives: To assess learner perception of high-fidelity mannequin-based simulation and debriefing to improve understanding of CDRs., Methods: Emergency medicine (EM) residents were exposed to two simulations designed to bring out the CDR concept known as "vertical line failure." Residents were then block-randomized to a technical/knowledge debriefing covering the medical subject matter or a CDR debriefing covering vertical line failure. They then completed a written survey and were interviewed by an ethnographer. Four investigators blinded to group assignment reviewed the interview transcripts and coded the comments. The comments were qualitatively analyzed and those upon which three out of four raters agreed were quantified. A random sample of 84 comments was assessed for interrater reliability using a kappa statistic., Results: Sixty-two residents from two EM residencies participated. Survey results were compared by technical (group A, n = 32) or cognitive (group B, n = 30) debriefing. There were 255 group A and 176 group B comments quantified. The kappa statistic for coding the interview comments was 0.42. The CDR debriefing group made more, and qualitatively richer, comments regarding CDR concepts. The technical debriefing group made more comments on the medical subjects of cases. Both groups showed an appreciation for the risk of diagnostic error., Conclusions: Survey data indicate that technical debriefing was better received than cognitive debriefing. The authors theorize that an understanding of CDRs can be facilitated through simulation training based on the analysis of interview comments.

The term "authority gradient" was first defined in aviation when it was noted that pilots and copilots may not communicate effectively in stressful situations if there is a significant difference in their experience, perceived expertise, or authority. A number of unintentional aviation, aerospace, and industrial incidents have been attributed, in part, to authority gradients. The concept of authority gradient was introduced to medicine in the Institute of Medicine report To Err Is Human, yet little has been written or acknowledged in the medical literature regarding its role in medical error. The practice of medicine and medical training programs are highly organized, hierarchical structures that depend on supervision by authority figures. The concept that authority gradients might contribute to medical error is largely unrecognized. This article presents one case and a series of examples to detail how authority gradients can contribute to medical error, and describes methods used in other disciplines to avoid their potentially negative impact.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Practice-Based Learning and Improvement competency incorporates lifelong learning techniques and self-reflection. Resident portfolios have received attention as a useful method for addressing this competency. A recent patient encounter provided an experienced clinical educator with the opportunity to develop a portfolio entry that was distributed to all of the residents and faculty in an emergency medicine residency. This report may assist educators in explaining how one could approach the development of the portfolio as a tool for self-assessment. A candid discussion by a senior faculty member about issues that contributed to medical error has been underreported in the medical literature.

Medication errors are frequent in the emergency department (ED). The unique operating characteristics of the ED may exacerbate their rate and severity. They are associated with variable clinical outcomes that range from inconsequential to death. Fifteen adult and pediatric cases are described here to illustrate a variety of errors. They may occur at any of the previously described five stages, from ordering a medication to its delivery. A sixth stage has been added to emphasize the final part of the medication administration process in the ED, drawing attention to considerations that should be made for patients being discharged home. The capability for dispensing medication, without surveillance by a pharmacist, provides an error-producing condition to which physicians and nurses should be especially vigilant. Except in very limited and defined situations, physicians should not administer medications. Adherence to defined roles would reduce the team communication errors that are a common theme in the cases described here.

A 59-year-old man presented to the emergency department (ED) with the chief complaint of "panic attacks." In total, he was evaluated by 14 faculty physicians, 2 fellows, and 16 residents from emergency medicine, cardiology, neurology, psychiatry, and internal medicine. These multiple transitions were responsible, in part, for the perpetuation of a failure to accurately diagnose the patient's underlying medical illness. The case illustrates the discontinuity of care that occurs at transitions, which may threaten the safety and quality of patient care. Considerable effort must be directed at making transitions effective and safe. Recommendations to improve transitions include a heightened awareness of cognitive biases operating at these vulnerable times, improving team situational awareness and communication, and exploring systems to facilitate effective transfer of relevant data.

The last decade has witnessed a growing awareness of medical error and the inadequacies of our health care delivery systems. The Harvard Practice Study and subsequent Institute of Medicine Reports brought national attention to long-overlooked problems with health care quality and patient safety. The Committee on Quality of Health Care in America challenged professional societies to develop curriculums on patient safety and adopt patient safety teaching into their training and certification requirements. The Patient Safety Task Force of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) was charged with that mission. The curriculum presented here offers an approach to teaching patient safety in emergency medicine.

Juxtaposing quality with education in emergency medicine (EM) generates two distinct issues: 1) the quality of education in EM, and 2) educating about quality in EM. There is considerable overlap between the two, and neither should be considered without the other. This paper focuses on education about quality in EM, with some discussion of the quality of EM education. Despite its apparent importance, there is a relative paucity of research on this topic.

Clinical decision making is a cornerstone of high-quality care in emergency medicine. The density of decision making is unusually high in this unique milieu, and a combination of strategies has necessarily evolved to manage the load. In addition to the traditional hypothetico-deductive method, emergency physicians use several other approaches, principal among which are heuristics. These cognitive short-cutting strategies are especially adaptive under the time and resource limitations that prevail in many emergency departments (EDs), but occasionally they fail. When they do, we refer to them as cognitive errors. They are costly but highly preventable. It is important that emergency physicians be aware of the nature and extent of these heuristics and biases, or cognitive dispositions to respond (CDRs). Thirty are catalogued in this article, together with descriptions of their properties as well as the impact they have on clinical decision making in the ED. Strategies are delineated in each case, to minimize their occurrence. Detection and recognition of these cognitive phenomena are a first step in achieving cognitive de-biasing to improve clinical decision making in the ED.

This case describes a 45-year-old woman with significant respiratory distress secondary to a left-sided pleural effusion that mandated an urgent thoracentesis. An adverse event occurred when the physician performed the procedure on the incorrect side of the patient. Results of the incident investigation followed by a discussion of medical errors models, common errors types, human factors considerations, and conditions that contribute to error are presented. Pertinent case-specific and general concepts of a system approach to reduce this type of medical error are discussed, and educational recommendations are offered.