The use of contextualised standardised client simulation to develop clinical reasoning in final year veterinary students

Clinical reasoning is an important skill for veterinary students to develop before graduation. Simulation has been studied in medical education as a method for developing clinical reasoning in students, but evidence supporting it is limited. This study involved the creation of a contextualized, standardized client simulation session that aimed to improve the clinical reasoning ability and confidence of final-year veterinary students. Sixty-eight participants completed three simulated primary-care consultations, with the client played by an actor and the pet by a healthy animal. Survey data showed that all participants felt that the session improved their clinical decision-making ability. Quantitative clinical reasoning self-assessment, performed using a validated rubric, triangulated this finding, showing an improvement in students’ perception of several components of their clinical reasoning skill level from before the simulation to after it. Blinded researcher analysis of the consultation video recordings found that students showed a significant increase in ability on the history-taking and making-sense-of-data (including formation of a differential diagnosis) components of the assessment rubric. Thirty students took part in focus groups investigating their experience with the simulation. Two themes arose from thematic analysis of these data: variety of reasoning methods and “It’s a different way of thinking.” The latter highlights differences between the decision making students practice during their time in education and the decision making they will use once they are in practice. Our findings suggest that simulation can be used to develop clinical reasoning in veterinary students, and they demonstrate the need for further research in this area

A Shot in the Dark: Failing to Recognize the Link Between Physical and Mental Illness

A 74-year-old widowed white man with chronic rheumatoid arthritis presented with nausea and weight loss. He was diagnosed with failure to thrive and admitted for hydration. Misoprostol was determined to be the etiology of his symptoms and he was discharged home. Three days later, he killed himself with a gunshot to the head. Clinicians often fail to recognize those at high risk for suicide. Suicidal risk is increased in both psychiatric and physical illness, and particularly when both are present. Psychiatric illness, particularly depression, often underlies chronic medical illness. The purpose of this case report is to remind health care providers of the strong association between depression and chronic medical illness, and to consider this in all patients, including those who present solely with physical symptoms. Recognizing this association and screening for it, as recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, may prevent the unnecessary tragedy of suicide

Use of inductive, problem-based clinical reasoning enhances diagnostic accuracy in final year veterinary students

Despite tremendous progression in the medical field, levels of diagnostic error remain unacceptably high. Cognitive failures in clinical reasoning are believed to be the major contributor to diagnostic error. There is evidence in the literature that teaching problem-based, inductive reasoning has the potential to improve clinical reasoning skills. In this study, 47 final-year veterinary medicine students at the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) were presented with a complex small animal medicine case. The participants were divided into two groups, one of which received a prioritized problem list in addition to the history, physical exam, and diagnostic test results provided to both groups. The students’ written approaches to the case were then analyzed and assigned a diagnostic accuracy score (DAS) and an inductive reasoning score (IRS). The IRS was based on a series of predetermined characteristics consistent with the inductive reasoning framework taught at the RVC. No significant difference was found between the DAS scores of each group, indicating that the provision of a prioritized problem list did not impact diagnostic accuracy. However, a significant positive correlation between the IRS and DAS was illustrated for both groups of students, suggesting increased use of inductive reasoning is associated with increased diagnostic accuracy. These results contribute to a body of research proposing that inductive, problem-based reasoning teaching delivered in an additive model, can enhance the clinical reasoning skills of students and reduce diagnostic error

Gut Feelings as a Third Track in General Practitioners’ Diagnostic Reasoning

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are often faced with complicated, vague problems in situations of uncertainty that they have to solve at short notice. In such situations, gut feelings seem to play a substantial role in their diagnostic process. Qualitative research distinguished a sense of alarm and a sense of reassurance. However, not every GP trusted their gut feelings, since a scientific explanation is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This paper explains how gut feelings arise and function in GPs' diagnostic reasoning. APPROACH: The paper reviews literature from medical, psychological and neuroscientific perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: Gut feelings in general practice are based on the interaction between patient information and a GP's knowledge and experience. This is visualized in a knowledge-based model of GPs' diagnostic reasoning emphasizing that this complex task combines analytical and non-analytical cognitive processes. The model integrates the two well-known diagnostic reasoning tracks of medical decision-making and medical problem-solving, and adds gut feelings as a third track. Analytical and non-analytical diagnostic reasoning interacts continuously, and GPs use elements of all three tracks, depending on the task and the situation. In this dual process theory, gut feelings emerge as a consequence of non-analytical processing of the available information and knowledge, either reassuring GPs or alerting them that something is wrong and action is required. The role of affect as a heuristic within the physician's knowledge network explains how gut feelings may help GPs to navigate in a mostly efficient way in the often complex and uncertain diagnostic situations of general practice. Emotion research and neuroscientific data support the unmistakable role of affect in the process of making decisions and explain the bodily sensation of gut feelings.The implications for health care practice and medical education are discussed

Attitudes of Veterinary Faculty to the Assessment of Clinical Reasoning Using Extended Matching Questions

For assessment purposes, clinical expertise is often divided into three broad components: scientific and clinical knowledge, clinical reasoning, and practical/technical skills. This structure can be used to define the tools used for assessment of clinical students. Knowledge can be assessed through a variety of written formats and skills through various practical assessments, including the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), but the assessment of clinical reasoning has proved to be far more challenging. A companion paper (Tomlin JL, Pead MJ, May SA. Veterinary students' attitudes toward the assessment of clinical reasoning using extended matching questions. J Vet Med Educ 35:612-621, 2008) reports on the identification and implementation of a valid and reliable method to assess clinical reasoning using clinical-scenario-based extended matching questions (EMQs) in the final examinations at the Royal Veterinary College and looks at students' response to the new examination format. Although EMQs were generally well accepted, many students were concerned about the implied encouragement of pattern recognition, a non-analytical form of clinical reasoning that results from recognition of familiar clinical situations. This paper addresses the attitudes of the leaching faculty to the EMQ format. The students' concerns about promotion of pattern recognition, was also explored In more depth. Overall, faculty perceived EMQs as an appropriate way to test clinical reasoning and as relevant to the experience that students would have gained during their clinical rotations. However, faculty felt that EMQs were difficult to write and that poorly written questions tended to promote pattern recognition. Almost half reiterated the students' concerns that pattern recognition may be an inappropriate reasoning strategy for undergraduates