Decision-making under pressure: medical errors in uncertain and dynamic environments
- PMID: 28578757
- DOI: 10.1071/AH16088
Decision-making under pressure: medical errors in uncertain and dynamic environments
Abstract
Objective This paper provides a narrative overview of the literature concerning clinical decision-making processes when staff come under pressure, particularly in uncertain, dynamic and emergency situations. Methods Studies between 1980 and 2015 were analysed using a six-phase thematic analysis framework to achieve an in-depth understanding of the complex origins of medical errors that occur when people and systems are under pressure and how work pressure affects clinical performance and patient outcomes. Literature searches were conducted using a Summons Search Service platform; search criteria included a variety of methodologies, resulting in the identification of 95 papers relevant to the present review. Results Six themes emerged in the present narrative review using thematic analysis: organisational systems, workload, time pressure, teamwork, individual human factors and case complexity. This analysis highlights that clinical outcomes in emergency situations are the result of a variety of interconnecting factors. These factors may affect the ability of clinical staff in emergency situations to provide quality, safe care in a timely manner. Conclusions The challenge for researchers is to build the body of knowledge concerning the safe management of patients, particularly where clinicians are working under pressure. This understanding is important for developing pathways that optimise clinical decision making in uncertain and dynamic environments. What is known about the topic? Emergency departments (EDs) are characterised by high complexity, high throughput and greater uncertainty compared with routine hospital wards or out-patient situations, and the ED is therefore prone to unpredictable workflows and non-replicable conditions when presented with unique and complex cases. What does this paper add? Clinical decision making can be affected by pressures with complex origins, including organisational systems, workload, time constraints, teamwork, human factors and case complexity. Interactions between these factors at different levels of the decision-making process can increase the complexity of problems and the resulting decisions to be made. What are the implications for practitioners? The findings of the present study provide further evidence that consideration of medical errors should be seen primarily from a 'whole-of-system' perspective rather than as being primarily the responsibility of individuals. Although there are strategies in place in healthcare organisations to eliminate errors, they still occur. In order to achieve a better understanding of medical errors in clinical practice in times of uncertainty, it is necessary to identify how diverse pressures can affect clinical decisions, and how these interact to influence clinical outcomes.
Similar articles
-
How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar;6(1):78-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2007.00098.x. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008. PMID: 21631815
-
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015. PMID: 26447009
-
Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015. PMID: 26447004
-
Going digital: a narrative overview of the clinical and organisational impacts of eHealth technologies in hospital practice.Aust Health Rev. 2017 Dec;41(6):646-664. doi: 10.1071/AH16233. Aust Health Rev. 2017. PMID: 28063462 Review.
-
The role of the physiotherapist practitioner in emergency departments: a critical appraisal.Emerg Nurse. 2005 May;13(2):26-31. doi: 10.7748/en2005.05.13.2.26.c1185. Emerg Nurse. 2005. PMID: 15912710 Review.
Cited by
-
Nurses' perception of uncertainty in clinical decision-making: A qualitative study.Heliyon. 2024 Aug 14;10(16):e36228. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36228. eCollection 2024 Aug 30. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 39253177 Free PMC article.
-
Trigger tool-based description of adverse events in helicopter emergency medical services in Qatar.BMJ Open Qual. 2023 Nov;12(4):e002263. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002263. BMJ Open Qual. 2023. PMID: 37963672 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical reasoning during the COVID-19 pandemic.J Res Med Sci. 2021 Aug 30;26:65. doi: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_1008_20. eCollection 2021. J Res Med Sci. 2021. PMID: 34729073 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
CADDIE2-evaluation of a clinical decision-support system for early detection of systemic inflammatory response syndrome in paediatric intensive care: study protocol for a diagnostic study.BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 19;9(6):e028953. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-028953. BMJ Open. 2019. PMID: 31221891 Free PMC article.
-
Patients' Perceptions of Quality of Care: A Teamwork Intervention Study in a Surgical Ward.SAGE Open Nurs. 2022 Feb 8;8:23779608221076814. doi: 10.1177/23779608221076814. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec. SAGE Open Nurs. 2022. PMID: 35155776 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Other Literature Sources