Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=33559390&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Enhancing clinical judgement in virtual care for complex chronic disease #MMPMID33559390
Prasad GVR
J Eval Clin Pract 2021[Jun]; 27 (3): 677-683 PMID33559390show ga
The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed traditional in-person care into a new reality of virtual care for patients with complex chronic disease (CCD), but how has this transformation impacted clinical judgement? I argue that virtual specialist-patient interaction challenges clinical reasoning and clinical judgement (clinical reasoning combined with statistical reasoning). However, clinical reasoning can improve by recognising the abductive, deductive, and inductive methods that the clinician employs. Abductive reasoning leading to an inference to the best explanation or invention of an explanatory hypothesis is the default response to unfamiliar or confusing situations. Deductive reasoning supports a previously established goal, but deductive accuracy requires sound premises leading to a valid conclusion. Inductive reasoning uses efficient data sorting, data interpretation, and plan creation without a previously established goal, and allows assessing inferential accuracy over time. In all cases, communication remains the backbone of the clinical encounter. Virtual care for CCD challenges clinical judgement by reducing available information, so even experienced specialists who use induction might default to deduction or abduction. The visit might shorten, decreasing narrative competence and in-turn management quality. Clinical judgement in virtual encounters can be enhanced by allowing sufficient time, employing allied health staff, using an advance script, avoiding dogmatic commitment to either virtual or in-person encounters, special training in virtual care, and conscious awareness of abductive, deductive, and inductive reasoning processes. Clinical judgement in virtual encounters especially calls for Gestalt cognition to assess a situational pattern irreducible to its parts and independent of its particulars, so that efficient data interpretation and self-reflection are enabled. Gestalt cognition integrates abduction, deduction, and induction, appropriately divides the time and effort spent on each, and can compensate for reduced available information. Evaluating one's clinical judgement for those components especially vulnerable to compromise can help optimize the delivery of virtual care for patients with CCD.
J+Eval+Clin+Pract 2021 ; 27 (3): 677-683
