Participatory Bullseye Toolkit Interview: Identifying Physicians’ Relative Prioritization of Decision Factors When Ordering Radiologic Imaging in a Hospital Setting
Author(s) -
Rayo Michael F.,
Pawar Chandni,
Sanders Elizabeth B.-N.,
Liston Beth W.,
Patterson Emily S.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
proceedings of the international symposium of human factors and ergonomics in healthcare
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2327-8595
pISSN - 2327-8579
DOI - 10.1177/2327857918071001
Subject(s) - task (project management) , prioritization , citizen journalism , decision aids , clinical decision making , psychology , medicine , medical education , computer science , family medicine , management science , pathology , engineering , alternative medicine , world wide web , systems engineering
Critical Decision Method (CDM), a popular cognitive task analysis (CTA) method, is an in-depth retrospective interview that uses a historical non-routine incident to identify experts’ decision-making factors in complex socio-technical settings with high consequences for failure. However, it is challenging to use CDM to make comparisons, including those between experts and trainees. We describe an alternative CTA method used to study physicians’ decision making for ordering diagnostic imaging. After being primed with 11 simulated patient scenarios, nine attending and 11 resident physicians were asked to map out and present their decision-making process with a bullseye participatory design toolkit. Interviews were analyzed qualitatively, revealing four common decision factors: diagnostic efficacy, patient safety, organizational constraints, and patient comfort. The bullseye maps were used to quantitatively measure priority differences between these decision factors. Attending and resident physicians both prioritized diagnostic efficacy over the other factors (2.38 vs. 3.71, p <.01, and 2.59 vs. 3.52, p<.01, respectively), but attending physicians’ decisions had a higher proportion of non-diagnostic items (65% vs. 50%, p = .008). Our results demonstrate the usefulness of this method in eliciting decision factors for a complex, face-valid task and for identifying differences due to levels of expertise and training.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom