The effect of time constraint on anticipation, decision making, and option generation in complex and dynamic environments

Researchers interested in performance in complex and dynamic situations have focused on how individuals predict their opponent(s) potential courses of action (i.e., during assessment) and generate potential options about how to respond (i.e., during intervention). When generating predictive options, previous research supports the use of cognitive mechanisms that are consistent with long-term working memory (LTWM) theory (Ericsson and Kintsch in Phychol Rev 102(2):211–245, 1995; Ward et al. in J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 7:231–254, 2013). However, when generating options about how to respond, the extant research supports the use of the take-the-first (TTF) heuristic (Johnson and Raab in Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 91:215–229, 2003). While these models provide possible explanations about how options are generated in situ, often under time pressure, few researchers have tested the claims of these models experimentally by explicitly manipulating time pressure. The current research investigates the effect of time constraint on option-generation behavior during the assessment and intervention phases of decision making by employing a modified version of an established option-generation task in soccer. The results provide additional support for the use of LTWM mechanisms during assessment across both time conditions. During the intervention phase, option-generation behavior appeared consistent with TTF, but only in the non-time-constrained condition. Counter to our expectations, the implementation of time constraint resulted in a shift toward the use of LTWM-type mechanisms during the intervention phase. Modifications to the cognitive-process level descriptions of decision making during intervention are proposed, and implications for training during both phases of decision making are discussed

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the diagnosis of meniscus tears.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic imaging represents the fastest growing segment of costs in the US health system. This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of alternative diagnostic approaches to meniscus tears of the knee, a highly prevalent disease that traditionally relies on MRI as part of the diagnostic strategy. PURPOSE: To identify the most efficient strategy for the diagnosis of meniscus tears. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A simple-decision model run as a cost-utility analysis was constructed to assess the value added by MRI in various combinations with patient history and physical examination (H&P). The model examined traumatic and degenerative tears in 2 distinct settings: primary care and orthopaedic sports medicine clinic. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: In both practice settings, H&P alone was widely preferred for degenerative meniscus tears. Performing MRI to confirm a positive H&P was preferred for traumatic tears in both practice settings, with a willingness to pay of less than US$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Performing an MRI for all patients was not preferred in any reasonable clinical scenario. The prevalence of a meniscus tear in a clinician's patient population was influential. For traumatic tears, MRI to confirm a positive H&P was preferred when prevalence was less than 46.7%, with H&P preferred above that. For degenerative tears, H&P was preferred until the prevalence reaches 74.2%, and then MRI to confirm a negative was the preferred strategy. In both settings, MRI to confirm positive physical examination led to more than a 10-fold lower rate of unnecessary surgeries than did any other strategy, while MRI to confirm negative physical examination led to a 2.08 and 2.26 higher rate than H&P alone in primary care and orthopaedic clinics, respectively. CONCLUSION: For all practitioners, H&P is the preferred strategy for the suspected degenerative meniscus tear. An MRI to confirm a positive H&P is preferred for traumatic tears for all practitioners. Consideration should be given to implementing alternative diagnostic strategies as well as enhancing provider education in physical examination skills to improve the reliability of H&P as a diagnostic test. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Alternative diagnostic strategies that do not include the use of MRI may result in decreased health care costs without harm to the patient and could possibly reduce unnecessary procedures