Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Finding and fixing mistakes: do checklists work for clinicians with different levels of experience?

Finding and fixing mistakes: do checklists work for clinicians with different levels of experience? Checklists that focus attention on key variables might allow clinicians to find and fix their mistakes. However, whether this approach can be applied to clinicians of varying degrees of expertise is unclear. Novice and expert clinicians vary in their predominant reasoning processes and in the types of errors they commit. We studied 44 clinicians with a range of electrocardiography (ECG) interpretation expertise: novice, intermediate and expert. Clinicians were asked to interpret 10 ECGs, self-report their predominant reasoning strategy and then check their interpretation with a checklist. We found that clinicians of all levels of expertise were able to use the checklist to find and fix mistakes. However, novice clinicians disproportionately benefited. Interestingly, while clinicians varied in their self-reported reasoning strategy, there was no relationship between reasoning strategy and checklist benefit. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Advances in Health Sciences Education Springer Journals

Finding and fixing mistakes: do checklists work for clinicians with different levels of experience?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/finding-and-fixing-mistakes-do-checklists-work-for-clinicians-with-WLVGIgxfng
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Education; Medical Education
ISSN
1382-4996
eISSN
1573-1677
DOI
10.1007/s10459-013-9459-3
pmid
23625338
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Checklists that focus attention on key variables might allow clinicians to find and fix their mistakes. However, whether this approach can be applied to clinicians of varying degrees of expertise is unclear. Novice and expert clinicians vary in their predominant reasoning processes and in the types of errors they commit. We studied 44 clinicians with a range of electrocardiography (ECG) interpretation expertise: novice, intermediate and expert. Clinicians were asked to interpret 10 ECGs, self-report their predominant reasoning strategy and then check their interpretation with a checklist. We found that clinicians of all levels of expertise were able to use the checklist to find and fix mistakes. However, novice clinicians disproportionately benefited. Interestingly, while clinicians varied in their self-reported reasoning strategy, there was no relationship between reasoning strategy and checklist benefit.

Journal

Advances in Health Sciences EducationSpringer Journals

Published: Apr 27, 2013

References