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

Learn More →

Clinician Mindfulness and Patient Safety

Clinician Mindfulness and Patient Safety COMMENTARY Roots of Diagnostic Errors Erica M. S. Sibinga, MD, MHS Cognitive dispositions to respond that influence the diag- Albert W. Wu, MD, MPH nostic process are characterized by a lack of awareness and responsiveness by the individual to his or her own cogni- 2,3 ATIENT SAFETY HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF CONSIDERABLE tive and affective processes. For example, confirmation bias interest over the last decade, with evidence show- favors the pursuit of data that support a diagnosis over data ing that medical errors are responsible for sub- that refute it. This may be compounded by anchoring bias, Pstantial morbidity and mortality. There has been a resistance to adapting appropriately to subsequent data significant progress in understanding, identifying, and that suggest alternative diagnoses. Together, confirmation addressing errors at a system level; however, the perfor- and anchoring bias can result in an incorrect diagnosis. This, mance of individual clinicians remains a crucial and in turn, reduces the chance of ameliorative treatment and largely unaddressed element of patient safety. Individual increases risks for adverse effects of unwarranted evalua- performance is important in diagnostic errors, but these tion and treatment. errors are difficult to measure and have received little 1,2 Mindfulness Qualities http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Clinician Mindfulness and Patient Safety

JAMA , Volume 304 (22) – Dec 8, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/clinician-mindfulness-and-patient-safety-cTzSgdMoxk
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2010 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.2010.1817
pmid
21139116
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

COMMENTARY Roots of Diagnostic Errors Erica M. S. Sibinga, MD, MHS Cognitive dispositions to respond that influence the diag- Albert W. Wu, MD, MPH nostic process are characterized by a lack of awareness and responsiveness by the individual to his or her own cogni- 2,3 ATIENT SAFETY HAS BEEN A TOPIC OF CONSIDERABLE tive and affective processes. For example, confirmation bias interest over the last decade, with evidence show- favors the pursuit of data that support a diagnosis over data ing that medical errors are responsible for sub- that refute it. This may be compounded by anchoring bias, Pstantial morbidity and mortality. There has been a resistance to adapting appropriately to subsequent data significant progress in understanding, identifying, and that suggest alternative diagnoses. Together, confirmation addressing errors at a system level; however, the perfor- and anchoring bias can result in an incorrect diagnosis. This, mance of individual clinicians remains a crucial and in turn, reduces the chance of ameliorative treatment and largely unaddressed element of patient safety. Individual increases risks for adverse effects of unwarranted evalua- performance is important in diagnostic errors, but these tion and treatment. errors are difficult to measure and have received little 1,2 Mindfulness Qualities

Journal

JAMAAmerican Medical Association

Published: Dec 8, 2010

References