Contemporary issuesThink and think again! Clinical decision making by advanced nurse practitioners in the Emergency Department
Introduction
Clinical decision making is a key component of all clinical practice. Over the years many decision making strategies and theories have been developed in order to assist nurses and other healthcare professionals with implementation of appropriate pathways of care for patients [2]. The decision making capabilities of the novice nurse in comparison to the expert has evoked much opinion and debate over the years [3], [14]. Recent literature highlights common decision making strategies and the decision making capabilities of nurses in the clinical area [7], [15]. Critical thinking ability, clinical experience, an in-depth knowledge base, and the ability to integrate and assimilate evidenced based research into practice, are just a few of the many skills required to assist in any decision making process [12]. In an Emergency Department (ED) it is clear that many of these decision-making attributes acquired by nurses are also challenged by often rapidly fluctuating contextual issues that may arise on any given day in the busy environment of the ED. However, over the past 40 years diagnostic errors have fallen from 17% to 12% which is good news but also disappointing given the advances in diagnostic tools [9]. A focus on clinical decision making may help in understanding the failure to reduce this incidence further.
The advanced nurse practitioner (ANP) in the ED faces decision making challenges daily. The role of the ANP in Ireland requires autonomous independent decision making for a specific identified cohort of patients. The ANP assesses, diagnoses and initiates a pathway of care for the patient within a strict criteria of guidelines and protocols from initial presentation to discharge. However, multiple stressors and the vastly unpredictable nature of the ED can present challenges to the decision making behaviour and thinking processes of ANP’s in assessing, diagnosing and providing appropriate treatment for their patients. Several key components such as cognitive aspects of human judgement and contextual issues that influence these human thought processes have been identified in the literature [9], [10].
In this paper it is proposed, using a case example, to reflect upon the processes of thought during the clinical decision making process used by an ANP during a consultation in the ED.
Section snippets
Psychological and contextual factors in decision making
Many theories on decision making have emerged from analysis of these human thought processes. Significant among these is the dual process decision making theory as identified by Croskerry [5] and Kahneman [10]. This theory identifies two main psychological processes of thought within clinical decision making as intuitive and analytical [6]. Intuitive decisions also known as System 1 Thinking are fast and abbreviated, with initial impressions forming unconscious diagnosis. Intuitive decision
Case discussion: intuition and analytical decision making
This case (Box 1) highlights the numerous contextual and psychological complexities and constraints that can accompany many seemingly straightforward case presentations for the ANP in the Emergency Department. In this case example, both the ANP and patient had limited time due to the ANP’s shift ending and the patient wanting to get home before midnight. It is reasonable to think that the intuitive thinking process by the experienced ANP in this apparently simple case should have been
Conclusion
Within nursing, the development of advanced practice roles for nurses involved in assessment, prescribing, referring and discharging patients, has seen the need for the adaptation of many strategies such as care pathways and algorithms for cardio pulmonary resuscitation and basic life support, in order to avoid bias and complacency in patient assessment and ensure rigor and error avoidance in the nurse/clinician/patient consultation and the decision making process. In supporting and educating
References (15)
- et al.
Framing effect debiasing in medical decision making
Patient Educ Couns
(2008) - et al.
An agenda for clinical decision making and judgement in nursing research and education
Int J Nurs Stud
(2013) A review of clinical decision making: models and current research
J Clin Nurs
(2008)From novice to expert: excellence and power in clinical nursing practice
(1984)- et al.
Accuracy of ‘My Gut Feeling’: comparing system 1 to system 2 decision-making for acuity prediction, disposition and diagnosis in an academic emergency department
West J Emerg Med
(2015) Achieving quality in clinical decision making: cognitive strategies and detection of bias
Acad Emerg Med
(2008)- et al.
Cognitive debiasing 1: origins of bias and theory of debiasing
BMJ Qual Saf
(2013)
Cited by (9)
Cognitive biases regarding utilization of emergency severity index among emergency nurses
2023, American Journal of Emergency MedicineClinical judgment conceptualization scoping review protocol
2022, Teaching and Learning in NursingCitation Excerpt :Through the research process, it was identified that numerous sources touched on this subject. Given the identified complexity of clinical judgment (Elliot, 2010; Manetti, 2018; Smyth & McCabe, 2017), it is essential to differentiate between its related terms. There is general agreement that clinical judgment results from appropriate critical thinking and clinical reasoning (Alfaro-LeFevre, 2017; Klenke-Borgmann et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2016; NCSBN, 2019).
Exploration and model development for emergency department waiting room nurse role: Synthesis of a three-phase sequential mixed methods study
2021, International Emergency NursingCitation Excerpt :Experienced emergency nurses were more likely to be triage-prepared, although the value of the WRN holding this skill-set varied in this study. The view that experienced emergency nurses would be better equipped to perform the role was expected, as they are more likely to deal with external factors such as a rapidly changing, busy, and often stressful waiting room environment [13]. Experienced clinical nurses with greater in-depth knowledge and critical thinking skills, are also able to assimilate all aspects of assessment, evidence-based practice and past experiences into their clinical decision-making, and anticipate potential patient problems [14].
The Practice of Medicine: Understanding Diagnostic Error
2020, Journal for Nurse PractitionersCitation Excerpt :Deductive reasoning is a slower process and is important even for the expert when an unfamiliar clinical pattern emerges.11 Combining the 2 systems can lead to improved accuracy of diagnoses.11,13 Overcoming system 1 processing is difficult, especially in emergent situations, because it is considered a more natural approach.12
‘Fast and frugal heuristics’: Clinical decision making in the Emergency Department
2018, International Emergency NursingCitation Excerpt :Emergency Medicine (EM) is defined by timely and accurate decision-making regarding the saving of life and limb [1,2]. Many theories have emerged within the literature about clinical decision making from the perspective of analysis of the human thought processes [3]. Elstein (1999) described heuristics as ‘mental shortcuts’ that aid in the clinical decision making process.
Clinical decision-making processes among graduate nurses, specialist nurses and nurse practitioners A collaborative international study
2024, International Nursing Review