Search

Introduction: The Emergency Severity Index (ESI©) is an initial measure of patient assessment in the emergency department (ED). It rates patients based on acuity and predicted resource intensity from Level 1 (most ill) to Level 5 (least resource intensive). Already implemented and evaluated in several US hospitals, ESI has yet to be evaluated in a Canadian setting or compared with the five- level Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). Objective: To compare the inter-observer reliability of 2 five-level triage and acuity scales. Methods: Ten triage nurses, who had all been trained in the use of CTAS, from 4 urban, academic Canadian EDs were randomly assigned either to training in ESI version 3 (ESI v.3) or to refresher training in CTAS. They independently assigned triage scores to 200 emergency cases, unaware of the rating by the other nurses. Results: Number of years of nursing practice was the only significant demographic difference found between the 2 groups (p = 0.014). A quadratically weighted kappa to measure the inter-observer reliability of the CTAS group was 0.91 (0.90, 0.99) and not significantly different from that of the ESI group 0.89 (0.88, 0.99). An inter-test generalizability (G) study performed on the variance components derived from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed G(5) = 0.90 (0.82, 0.99). Conclusions: After 3 hours of training, experienced triage nurses were able to perform triage as- sessments using ESI v.3 with the same inter-observer reliability as those with experience and refresher training in using the CTAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although decades of research have yielded considerable insight into physicians' clinical reasoning processes, assessing these processes remains challenging; thus, the authors sought to compare diagnostic performance and the utility of clinical vignette-based assessment under testing conditions designed to encourage either automatic or analytic thought., Method: This 2011-2012 multicenter randomized study of 393 clinicians (medical students, postgraduate trainees, and faculty) measured diagnostic accuracy on clinical vignettes under two conditions: one encouraged participants to give their first impression (FI), and the other led participants through a directed search (DS) for the correct diagnosis. The authors compared accuracy, feasibility, reliability, and relation to United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) scores under each condition., Results: A 2 (instructional condition) × 2 (vignette complexity) × 3 (experience level) analysis of variance revealed no difference in accuracy as a function of instructional condition (F[1,379] = 2.44, P = .12), but demonstrated the expected main effects of vignette complexity (F[1,379] = 965.2, P < .001) and experience (F[2,379] = 39.6, P < .001). Pearson correlations revealed greater associations between assessment scores and USMLE performance in the FI condition than in the DS condition (P < .001). Spearman-Brown calculations consistently indicated that alpha ≥ 0.75 could be achieved more efficiently under the FI condition relative to the DS condition., Conclusions: Instructions to trust one's first impres-sions result in similar performance when compared with instructions to consider clinical information in a systematic fashion, but have greater utility when used for the purposes of assessment.

Purpose: To further the development of a substantive theory of expert diagnostic practice, the authors explored the ways in which exceptional physicians, nominated by their peers, conceptualized their own diagnostic expertise specifically and diagnostic excellence generally., Method: In this grounded theory, interview-based study, physicians at six North American research sites were nominated by their peers as exceptional diagnosticians and exceptional professionals and invited to participate in the study. A saturation sample included 34 participants, 20 exceptional diagnosticians, and 14 exceptional professionals. Using a constant comparative approach, the authors conducted one-on-one interviews with participants, transcribed the audiotapes of those interviews, and analyzed them for emergent themes. They developed a stable thematic structure and applied it to the entire data set., Results: Four interconnected themes emerged that inform the community's understanding of how physicians conceptualize expert diagnostic practice: (1) possession of extensive knowledge built through purposeful, continuous engagement in clinical practice, (2) possession of the skills to effectively gather patient stories, (3) reflective integration of that knowledge and those patient stories during diagnosis, and (4) continuous learning through clinical practice., Conclusions: Exploring these results within the context of current discourses in medical education brings to the forefront two key features of physicians' construction of diagnostic excellence: (1) the integrated nature of the medical competencies that underpin the diagnostic process and (2) the optimally adaptive nature of the diagnostic process. These findings can inform the development of practical and effective pedagogical strategies to guide trainees, clinicians, and medical educators who strive for excellence.

Purpose: Informed self-assessment describes the set of processes through which individuals use external and internal data to generate an appraisal of their own abilities. The purpose of this project was to explore the tensions described by learners and professionals when informing their self-assessments of clinical performance., Method: This 2008 qualitative study was guided by principles of grounded theory. Eight programs in five countries across undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing medical education were purposively sampled. Seventeen focus groups were held (134 participants). Detailed analyses were conducted iteratively to understand themes and relationships., Results: Participants experienced multiple tensions in informed self-assessment. Three categories of tensions emerged: within people (e.g., wanting feedback, yet fearing disconfirming feedback), between people (e.g., providing genuine feedback yet wanting to preserve relationships), and in the learning/practice environment (e.g., engaging in authentic self-assessment activities versus "playing the evaluation game"). Tensions were ongoing, contextual, and dynamic; they prevailed across participant groups, infusing all components of informed self-assessment. They also were present in varied contexts and at all levels of learners and practicing physicians., Conclusions: Multiple tensions, requiring ongoing negotiation and renegotiation, are inherent in informed self-assessment. Tensions are both intraindividual and interindividual and they are culturally situated, reflecting both professional and institutional influences. Social learning theories (social cognitive theory) and sociocultural theories of learning (situated learning and communities of practice) may inform our understanding and interpretation of the study findings. The findings suggest that educational interventions should be directed at individual, collective, and institutional cultural levels. Implications for practice are presented.

Purpose: To assess the consistency of ratings assigned by health sciences faculty members relative to community members during an innovative admissions protocol called the Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI)., Method: A nine-station MMI was created and 54 candidates to an undergraduate MD program participated in the exercise in Spring 2003. Three stations were staffed with a pair of faculty members, three with a pair of community members, and three with one member of each group. Raters completed a four-item evaluation form. All participants completed post-MMI questionnaires. Generalizability Theory was used to examine the consistency of the ratings provided within each of these three subgroups., Results: The overall test reliability was found to be .78 and a Decision Study suggested that admissions committees should distribute their resources by increasing the number of interviews to which candidates are exposed rather than increasing the number of interviewers within each interview. Divergence of ratings was greater within the pairing of community member to faculty member and least for pairings of community members. Participants responded positively to the MMI., Conclusion: The MMI provides a reliable protocol for assessing the personal qualities of candidates by accounting for context specificity with a multiple sampling approach. Increasing the heterogeneity of interviewers may increase the heterogeneity of the accepted group of candidates. Further work will determine the extent to which different groups of raters provide equally valid (albeit different) judgments.