Home Re-thinking morbidity and mortality
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Re-thinking morbidity and mortality

  • Sumner Abraham EMAIL logo , Andrew Parsons , Brian Uthlaut and Peggy Plews-Ogan
Published/Copyright: July 5, 2020

Abstract

Despite the breadth of patient safety initiatives, physicians talking about their mistakes to other physicians is a difficult thing to do. This difficulty may be exacerbated by a limited exposure to how to analyze and discuss mistakes and respond in a productive way. At the University of Virginia, we recognized the importance of understanding cognitive biases for residents in both their clinical and personal professional development. We re-designed our resident led morbidity and mortality (M&M) conference using a model that integrates dual-process theory and metacognition to promote informed reflection and analysis of cognitive diagnostic errors. We believe that structuring M&M in this way builds a culture that encourages reflection together to learn our most difficult diagnostic errors and to engage in where our thought processes went wrong. In slowly building this culture, we hope to inoculate residents with the habits of mind that can best protect them from harmful biases in their clinical reasoning while instilling a culture of self-reflection.


Corresponding author: Sumner Abraham, MD, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia Health System: UVA Department of Medicine, 135 Hospital Drive Cobb Hall Rm 1031, PO Box 800466, 22908, Charlottesville, VA, United States, Phone: +(434) 243 6038, E-mail:

  1. Research funding: None declared.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.

References

1. Schiff, GD, Puopolo, AL, Huben-Kearney, A, Yu, W, Keohane, C, McDonough, P et al. Primary care closed claims experience of Massachusetts malpractice insurers. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:2063–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.11070.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Marcum, JA. An integrated model of clinical reasoning: dualprocess theory of cognition and metacognition. J Eval Clin Pract 2012;18:954–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01900.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Newman-Toker, DE, Pronovost, PJ. Diagnostic errors – the next Frontier for patient safety. J Am Med Assoc 2009;301:1060–2. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.249.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Croskerry, P. Context is everything or how could I have been that stupid?. Healthc Q Tor Ont. 2009;12:171–6. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.2009.20945.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Reilly, JB, Myers, JS, Salvador, D, Trowbridge, RL. Use of a novel, modified fishbone diagram to analyze diagnostic errors. Diagnosis 2014;1:167–71. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2013-0040.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

6. Young, M, Thomas, A, Gordon, D, Gruppen, L, Lubarsky, S, Rencic, J, et al. The terminology of clinical reasoning in health professions education: implications and considerations. Med Teach 2019;41:1277–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2019.1635686.Search in Google Scholar

7. Croskerry, P, Petrie, DA, Reilly, JB, Tait, G. Deciding about fast and slow decisions. Acad Med 2014;89:197–200. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000121.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Mamede, S, Schmidt, HG. Reflection in diagnostic reasoning: what really matters?. Acad Med 2014;89:959–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000306.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Norman, GR, Monteiro, SD, Sherbino, J, Ilgen, JS, Schmidt, HG, Mamede, S. The causes of errors in clinical reasoning: cognitive biases, knowledge deficits, and dual process thinking. Acad Med 2017;92:23–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000001421.Search in Google Scholar

10. Kahneman, D, Tversky, A. On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychol Rev 1996;103:582–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.582.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Mamede, S, Schmidt, HG, Rikers, RM, Custers, EJ, Splinter, TA, van Saase, JL. Conscious thought beats deliberation without atten- tion in diagnostic decision-making: at least when you are an expert. Psychol Rev 2010;74:586–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-010-0281-8.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

12. Devine, P, Forscher, P, Cox, W, Kaatz, A, Sheridan, J, Carnes, M. A Gender Bias Habit-Breaking Intervention led to increased hirinig of female faculty in STEMM departments. J Exp Soc Psychol 2017;73:211–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.002.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

13. Hall, KK, Schiff, G. “Patient safety practice: education and training” making Healthcare safer III. Content last reviewed April 2020. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/making-healthcare-safer/mhs3/index.html.Search in Google Scholar

14. Mamede, S, Hautz, WE, Berendonk, C, Hautz, SC, Sauter, TC, Rotgans, J, et al. Think twice: effects on diagnostic accuracy of returning to the case to reflect upon the initial diagnosis. Acad Med 2020;95:1223–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000003153.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Schiff, GD, Martin, SA, Eidelman, DH, Volk, LA, Ruan, E, Cassel, C, et al. Ten principles for more conservative, care-full diagnosis. Ann Intern Med 2018;169:643–5. https://doi.org/10.7326/l19-0147.Search in Google Scholar

16. Simpkin, AL, Schwartzstein, RM. Tolerating Uncertainty—the next medical revolution. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1713–15. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1606402.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Croskerry, P, Singhal, G, Mamede, S. Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:65–72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001713.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

18. Croskerry, P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med 2003;78:775–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200308000-00003.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2020-03-23
Accepted: 2020-05-03
Published Online: 2020-07-05
Published in Print: 2021-05-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Machine learning in laboratory diagnostics: valuable resources or a big hoax?
  4. Review
  5. Diagnosis of mast cell activation syndrome: a global “consensus-2”
  6. Opinion Papers
  7. Re-thinking morbidity and mortality
  8. Improving diagnosis by feedback and deliberate practice: one-on-one coaching for diagnostic maturation
  9. Original Articles
  10. Using the NAM diagnostic process framework to teach clinical reasoning in computerized case presentations to 251 medical students
  11. The variability in how physicians think: a casebased diagnostic simulation exercise
  12. Missed acute myocardial infarction in the emergency department-standardizing measurement of misdiagnosis-related harms using the SPADE method
  13. Feasibility of patient-reported diagnostic errors following emergency department discharge: a pilot study
  14. An estimate of missed pediatric sepsis in the emergency department
  15. Head Computed tomography during emergency department treat-and-release visit for headache is associated with increased risk of subsequent cerebrovascular disease hospitalization
  16. A diagnostic time-out to improve differential diagnosis in pediatric abdominal pain
  17. Development of a rubric for assessing delayed diagnosis of appendicitis, diabetic ketoacidosis and sepsis
  18. Between Web search engines and artificial intelligence: what side is shown in laboratory tests?
  19. Impact of water temperature on reconstitution of quality controls for routine hemostasis testing
  20. Development of an algorithm for the identification of leukemic hematolymphoid neoplasms in Primary Care patients
  21. Establishing a stable platform for the measurement of blood endotoxin levels in the dialysis population
  22. Brazilian laboratory indicators benchmarking program: three-year experience on pre-analytical quality indicators
  23. The accuracy of nipple discharge cytology in detecting breast cancer
  24. Letter to the Editor
  25. Results of a hospital survey on critical values communication
  26. Online Only: Congress Abstracts
  27. The Diagnostic Error in Medicine 13th Annual International Conference
Downloaded on 11.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/dx-2020-0040/html
Scroll to top button