AI Article Synopsis

  • Physicians and nurses often have differing perspectives on patient care, which can lead to essential aspects being overlooked if their clinical reasoning is assumed to be the same.
  • A systematic review was conducted to compare the clinical reasoning features of both professions, using a layered analysis approach that distinguished philosophical, principled, and technical elements.
  • Key differences were identified in professional paradigms and approaches to patient care, including contrasts in focus, patient involvement, and diagnostic concepts, highlighting the importance of understanding these differences for improving patient care and education.

Article Abstract

When physicians and nurses are looking at the same patient, they may not see the same picture. If assuming that the clinical reasoning of both professions is alike and ignoring possible differences, aspects essential for care can be overlooked. Understanding the multifaceted concept of clinical reasoning of both professions may provide insight into the nature and purpose of their practices and benefit patient care, education and research. We aimed to identify, compare and contrast the documented features of clinical reasoning of physicians and nurses through the lens of layered analysis and to conduct a simultaneous concept analysis. The protocol of this systematic integrative review was published doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049862. A comprehensive search was performed in four databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Psychinfo, and Web of Science) from 30th March 2020 to 27th May 2020. A total of 69 Empirical and theoretical journal articles about clinical reasoning of practitioners were included: 27 nursing, 37 medical, and five combining both perspectives. Two reviewers screened the identified papers for eligibility and assessed the quality of the methodologically diverse articles. We used an onion model, based on three layers: Philosophy, Principles, and Techniques to extract and organize the data. Commonalities and differences were identified on professional paradigms, theories, intentions, content, antecedents, attributes, outcomes, and contextual factors. The detected philosophical differences were located on a care-cure and subjective-objective continuum. We observed four principle contrasts: a broad or narrow focus, consideration of the patient as such or of the patient and his relatives, hypotheses to explain or to understand, and argumentation based on causality or association. In the technical layer a difference in the professional concepts of diagnosis and the degree of patient involvement in the reasoning process were perceived. Clinical reasoning can be analysed by breaking it down into layers, and the onion model resulted in detailed features. Subsequently insight was obtained in the differences between nursing and medical reasoning. The origin of these differences is in the philosophical layer (professional paradigms, intentions). This review can be used as a first step toward gaining a better understanding and collaboration in patient care, education and research across the nursing and medical professions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10020202PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1017783DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

clinical reasoning
20
nursing medical
12
reasoning
8
systematic integrative
8
integrative review
8
physicians nurses
8
reasoning professions
8
patient care
8
care education
8
onion model
8

Similar Publications

Unsafe Care and Fake News in Freeman-Burian Syndrome.

Clin Case Rep

January 2025

Craig R Dufresne Fairfax Virginia USA.

Freeman-Burian syndrome is a rare craniofacial syndrome surrounded by fake news. This situation shows the strong connection between the quality of a literature search and clinical reasoning displayed in patient care, especially in care of patients with rare conditions.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: The authors aimed to determine if medical students' self-assessment of abilities and performance differed by gender during the psychiatry clerkship and if these differences were reflected objectively in test scores or clinical evaluations from educators.

Methods: Data from mid-clerkship self-assessments completed during the psychiatry core clerkship were reviewed from two classes of medical students. Students rated their performance on 14 items across five domains: knowledge/clinical reasoning, differential diagnosis, data presentation, studying skills, and teamwork as "below," "at," or "above expected level.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

In response to increased focus on the issue of Assisted Dying (AD) in the UK due to the presentation of The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-25 [1] and bills before parliaments in the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Scotland, the British Geriatric Society (BGS) recently developed a position statement opposing legalisation of AD in the UK [2]. We set out our key reasoning behind this position, namely the current adverse health and social care context and significant concern about whether effective safeguards can be created to protect older people with complex needs from undue harms. The BGS asks for improved, personalised, multidisciplinary care for older people at the end of their lives, including high-quality palliative and end-of-life care.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Artificial Intelligence-Powered Training Database for Clinical Thinking: App Development Study.

JMIR Form Res

January 2025

Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.

Background: With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), medicine has entered the era of intelligent medicine, and various aspects, such as medical education and talent cultivation, are also being redefined. The cultivation of clinical thinking abilities poses a formidable challenge even for seasoned clinical educators, as offline training modalities often fall short in bridging the divide between current practice and the desired ideal. Consequently, there arises an imperative need for the expeditious development of a web-based database, tailored to empower physicians in their quest to learn and hone their clinical reasoning skills.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objectives: Diagnostic error is a global emergency. Context specificity is likely a source of the alarming rate of error and refers to the vexing phenomenon whereby a physician can see two patients with the same presenting complaint, identical history and examination findings, but due to the presence of contextual factors, decides on two different diagnoses. Studies have not empirically addressed the potential role of context specificity in management reasoning and errors with a diagnosis may not consistently translate to actual patient care.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!