PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Croskerry

Publications and source records attributed to P Croskerry.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Setting the educational agenda and curriculum for error prevention in emergency medicine.

Graduate and postgraduate medical education currently teaches safety in patient care by instilling a deep sense of personal responsibility in student practitioners. To increase safety, medical education will have to begin to introduce new concepts from the "safety sciences," without losing the advantages that the values of commitment and responsibility have gained. There are two related educational goals. First, we in emergency medicine (EM) must develop a group of safety-educated practitioners who can understand and implement safe practice innovations in their clinical settings, and will be instrumental in changing our professional culture. Second, EM must develop a group of teachers and researchers who can begin to deeply understand how safety is maintained in emergency care, develop solutions that will work in emergency department settings, and pass on those insights and innovations. The specifics of what should be taught are outlined briefly. Work is currently ongoing to identify more specifically the core content that should be included in educational programs on patient safety in emergency care. Finally, careful attention will have to be paid to the way in which these principles are taught. It seems unlikely that a series of readings and didactic lectures alone will be effective. The analysis of meaningful cases, perhaps supplemented by high-fidelity simulation, seems to hold promise for more successful education in patient safety.

Curriculum↗

The cognitive imperative: thinking about how we think.

There are three domains of expertise required for consistently effective performance in emergency medicine (EM): procedural, affective, and cognitive. Most of the activity is performed in the cognitive domain. Studies in the cognitive sciences have focused on a number of common and predictable biases in the thinking process, many of which are relevant to the practice of EM. It is important to understand these biases and how they might influence clinical decision-making behavior. Among the specialities, EM provides a unique clinical milieu of inconstancy, uncertainty, variety, and complexity. Injury and illness are seen within narrow time windows, often under pressured ambient conditions. These operating characteristics force practitioners to adopt a distinctive blend of thinking strategies. Principal among them is the use of heuristics, a form of abbreviated thinking that often leads to successful outcomes but that occasionally may result in error. A number of opportunities exist to overcome interdisciplinary, linguistic, and other historical obstacles to develop a sound approach to understanding how we think in EM. This will lead to a better awareness of our cognitive processes, an improved capacity to teach effectively about cognitive strategies, and, ultimately, the minimization or avoidance of clinical error.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

The feedback sanction.

The emergency department (ED) is a complex environment. Its equilibrium, or homeostasis, is critically dependent on the continuous action of feedback processes. For any system to function efficiently, it needs to know the outcomes of specific actions in a consistent, reliable, and expeditious way. Historical attitudes and the unique operating characteristics of the ED have combined to impose sanctions on the proper provision of feedback. The following features have been identified as obstructive to optimal feedback operation: incomplete awareness of the significance of the problem, excessive time and work pressures, case infrequency, deficiencies in specialty follow-up, communication failures, deficient reporting systems for near-misses, error, and adverse events, biases in case review processes, shift changeover times, and shiftwork. The result is that clinicians, nurses, and trainees are working in conditions that are suboptimal for the provision of safe care, as well as for learning and job fulfillment. Good feedback is a necessary condition for well-calibrated performance by individuals, and is integral to effective team function. More needs to be known about outcomes for feedback to work efficiently. The critical role of feedback in other aspects of ED function, such as education and human factors engineering, should be emphasized. The current interest in medical error and evolving attitudes toward a new culture of patient safety provide a unique opportunity to examine feedback and the critical role it plays in ED function.

Emergency Medicine↗

Clinical decision making: an emergency medicine perspective.

Clinical decision making (CDM) describes a form of qualitative inquiry that examines the thought processes involved in making medical decisions. A significant body of literature exists on the orderly "hypothetico-deductive" model of clinical decision making. However, very little has been written on how CDM differs in the acute setting. This paper reviews the common methods of CDM and their relevance to emergency medicine (EM). The concept of diagnostic uncertainty and the utility of the diagnosis of unknown etiology in the disposition phase of the emergency patient visit are discussed. Finally, a unique EM perspective on clinical decision-making errors is presented.

Adult↗

Ketorolac versus acetaminophen-codeine in the emergency department treatment of acute low back pain.

Acute low back pain is a common problem in the emergency department (ED). Effective management of acute pain enhances early rehabilitation and recovery. Given the importance of inflammatory mediators in pain generation and the adverse effects associated with opioids, it is logical to expect that a non-opioid agent with antiinflammatory and analgesic properties would provide excellent analgesia with fewer adverse effects. This double-blind, randomized, multicenter clinical trial, performed in six university and community hospital EDs, compares the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of ketorolac to those of acetaminophen-codeine in ED patients with acute musculoskeletal low back pain. Our hypothesis was that ketorolac would provide superior analgesia with fewer adverse effects. One hundred twenty-three patients with acute low back pain were randomized to receive ketorolac (KET, N = 63) or acetaminophen-codeine (ACOD, N = 60). Most (79%) were males, and the mean age was 34.5 years. After baseline clinical assessment, patients were treated with ketorolac (10 mg every 4 to 6 h as needed, up to four daily doses) or acetaminophen-codeine (600 mg-60 mg, respectively, every 4 to 6 h as needed, up to six daily doses) and followed for one week. Pain intensity was assessed on visual analogue and categorical scales. Functional capacity, overall pain relief, and overall medication rating were assessed on categorical scales. Adverse events were documented. Primary outcomes included: 1) Pain intensity differences, based on visual analogue scores, for the 0 to 6 h treatment phase. 2) Incidence of adverse events. Secondary outcomes included analgesic efficacy, functional capacity, and overall subjective drug evaluation at one week. Both drugs provided substantial pain relief, with maximal effect 2.2 h after oral dosing. There were no significant differences in analgesic efficacy, functional capacity, or overall pain relief between the two groups. Sixteen patients (10 KET vs. 6 ACOD, NS) withdrew prematurely because of drug inefficacy. Patients in the ACOD group reported significantly more adverse drug events and serious adverse drug events. Seven patients--all in the ACOD group--withdrew from the study because of adverse drug events. Based on comparable efficacy and a superior adverse event profile, ketorolac was preferable to acetaminophen with codeine for the treatment of acute low back pain in the ED.

Acetaminophen↗