Speed versus accuracy in collective decision making

We demonstrate a speed versus accuracy trade-off in collective decision making. House-hunting ant colonies choose a new nest more quickly in harsh conditions than in benign ones and are less discriminating. The errors that occur in a harsh environment are errors of judgement not errors of omission because the colonies have discovered all of the alternative nests before they initiate an emigration. Leptothorax albipennis ants use quorum sensing in their house hunting. They only accept a nest, and begin rapidly recruiting members of their colony, when they find within it a sufficient number of their nest-mates. Here we show that these ants can lower their quorum thresholds between benign and harsh conditions to adjust their speed-accuracy trade-off. Indeed, in harsh conditions these ants rely much more on individual decision making than collective decision making. Our findings show that these ants actively choose to take their time over judgements and employ collective decision making in benign conditions when accuracy is more important than speed.     

Designing an implementation strategy to improve interprofessional shared decision making in sciatica: study protocol of the DISC study

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Sciatica is a common condition worldwide that is characterized by radiating leg pain and regularly caused by a herniated disc with nerve root compression. Sciatica patients with persisting leg pain after six to eight weeks were found to have similar clinical outcomes and associated costs after prolonged conservative treatment or surgery at one year follow-up. Guidelines recommend that the team of professionals involved in sciatica care and patients jointly decide about treatment options, so-called interprofessional shared decision making (SDM). However, there are strong indications that SDM for sciatica patients is not integrated in daily practice. We designed a study aiming to explore the barriers and facilitators associated with the everyday embedding of SDM for sciatica patients. All related relevant professionals and patients are involved to develop a tailored strategy to implement SDM for sciatica patients. METHODS: The study consists of two phases: identification of barriers and facilitators and development of an implementation strategy. First, barriers and facilitators are explored using semi-structured interviews among eight professionals of each (para)medical discipline involved in sciatica care (general practitioners, physical therapists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons). In addition, three focus groups will be conducted among patients. Second, the identified barriers and facilitators will be ranked using a questionnaire among a representative Dutch sample of 200 GPs, 200 physical therapists, 200 neurologists, all 124 neurosurgeons, 200 orthopedic surgeons, and 100 patients. A tailored team-based implementation strategy will be developed based on the results of the first phase using the principles of intervention mapping and an expert panel. DISCUSSION: Little is known about effective strategies to increase the uptake of SDM. Most implementation strategies only target a single discipline, whereas multiple disciplines are involved in SDM among sciatica patients. The results of this study can be used as an example for implementing SDM in other patient groups receiving multidisciplinary complex care (e.g., elderly) and can be generalized to other countries with similar context, thereby contributing to a worldwide increase SDM in preference sensitive choices.     

Medical malpractice: a case study in medical and legal decision making

The conference was organized in part to dispel some of the misinformation that interferes with cooperative efforts of attorneys and physicians to redress the malpractice situation. During discussion of the hypothetical case, participants identified how medical decision-making responsibilities were allocated among health care providers caring for the patient. Panel members suggested ways in which medical decision making might be affected by non-medical factors such as third-party reimbursement (e.g., selection of inpatient or outpatient setting, the opportunity to discuss issues related to informed consent prior to the day of a procedure) and potential malpractice litigation (e.g., documentation in charts, use of diagnostic procedures). The characterization of decision-making roles and responsibilities differed somewhat for purposes of malpractice litigation; that is, which caregivers might be named as defendants. Panel members reconstructed the development of the medical incident into a legal case. Plaintiff's attorney commented that it is often a hospital employee who advises the family to consult an attorney and described some of the constraints on information gathering (e.g., the rule of "discovery" requiring that suit be filed before defendants can be forced to give statements about what happened, insurance contract provisions prohibiting physicians from talking without legal counsel present to persons who indicate that they plan to file suit). He also briefly explained the rationale for the contingency fee arrangement in these cases. Describing the role of the medical expert witness and the need to review the medical record, he outlined the process of deciding whether to pursue a malpractice case. In making this decision, plaintiff's attorney evaluates the facts to identify issues in the case, to determine if there are deviations from the standard of care, and to try to predict jury reaction. If a suit is filed, defense attorneys employed by the hospital, insurance company, or individual defendants will decide, based on facts including coverage limits, possible publicity, and likelihood of successful prosecution, whether the case should be settled and for what amount. Interests represented by the defense attorneys differ and may affect settlement strategies. Physician feelings of concern for the patient/family or desire for vindication will, to varying degrees, be factors in the decision to try or settle a case. Panel members explored several important policy issues. Among these were the effect of malpractice cases on doctor-patient communications and ethical issues concerning expert witnesses.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Consensus decision making in animals

Individual animals routinely face decisions that are crucial to their fitness. In social species, however, many of these decisions need to be made jointly with other group members because the group will split apart unless a consensus is reached. Here, we review empirical and theoretical studies of consensus decision making, and place them in a coherent framework. In particular, we classify consensus decisions according to the degree to which they involve conflict of interest between group members, and whether they involve either local or global communication; we ask, for different categories of consensus decision, who makes the decision, what are the underlying mechanisms, and what are the functional consequences. We conclude that consensus decision making is common in non-human animals, and that cooperation between group members in the decision-making process is likely to be the norm, even when the decision involves significant conflict of interest.     

Situationally-sensitive knowledge translation and relational decision making in hyperacute stroke: a qualitative study

Stroke is a leading cause of disability. Early treatment of acute ischaemic stroke with rtPA reduces the risk of longer term dependency but carries an increased risk of causing immediate bleeding complications. To understand the challenges of knowledge translation and decision making about treatment with rtPA in hyperacute stroke and hence to inform development of appropriate decision support we interviewed patients, their family and health professionals. The emergency setting and the symptomatic effects of hyper-acute stroke shaped the form, content and manner of knowledge translation to support decision making. Decision making about rtPA in hyperacute stroke presented three conundrums for patients, family and clinicians. 1) How to allow time for reflection in a severely time-limited setting. 2) How to facilitate knowledge translation regarding important treatment risks and benefits when patient and family capacity is blunted by the effects and shock of stroke. 3) How to ensure patient and family views are taken into account when the situation produces reliance on the expertise of clinicians. Strategies adopted to meet these conundrums were fourfold: face to face communication; shaping decisions; incremental provision of information; and communication tailored to the individual patient. Relational forms of interaction were understood to engender trust and allay anxiety. Shaping decisions with patients was understood as an expression of confidence by clinicians that helped alleviate anxiety and offered hope and reassurance to patients and their family experiencing the shock of the stroke event. Neutral presentations of information and treatment options promoted uncertainty and contributed to anxiety. 'Drip feeding' information created moments for reflection: clinicians literally made time. Tailoring information to the particular patient and family situation allowed clinicians to account for social and emotional contexts. The principal responses to the challenges of decision making about rtPA in hyperacute stroke were relational decision support and situationally-sensitive knowledge translation.     

Temporal decision making in complex environments

The basic hypothesis of the author is that under the influence of technological development and market pressure, situations take on temporal characteristics that are more and more difficult for the operator to control. The temporal strategies traditionally installed by the operator disappear, are transferred or transformed. Far from counterbalancing these phenomena, the displays, as they are designed in the workplace, obliterate the temporal dimension. The errors that are seen to appear are the product of a mismatch between the characteristics of the situation and the operator's resources. Four mechanisms of time estimation are discussed. Field study results on temporal strategies, such as anticipation, assessment of a process evolution and planning adjustment are developed.     

Effective continuing professional development for translating shared decision making in primary care: A study protocol

Background

There is growing interest in the use of cognitive, behavioural, and organisational theories in implementation research. However, the extent of use of theory in implementation research is uncertain.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of use of theory in 235 rigorous evaluations of guideline dissemination and implementation studies published between 1966 and 1998. Use of theory was classified according to type of use (explicitly theory based, some conceptual basis, and theoretical construct used) and stage of use (choice/design of intervention, process/mediators/moderators, and post hoc/explanation).

Results

Fifty-three of 235 studies (22.5%) were judged to have employed theories, including 14 studies that explicitly used theory. The majority of studies (n = 42) used only one theory; the maximum number of theories employed by any study was three. Twenty-five different theories were used. A small number of theories accounted for the majority of theory use including PRECEDE (Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational Diagnosis and Evaluation), diffusion of innovations, information overload and social marketing (academic detailing).

Conclusions

There was poor justification of choice of intervention and use of theory in implementation research in the identified studies until at least 1998. Future research should explicitly identify the justification for the interventions. Greater use of explicit theory to understand barriers, design interventions, and explore mediating pathways and moderators is needed to advance the science of implementation research.     

Barriers and facilitators to implement shared decision making in multidisciplinary sciatica care: a qualitative study

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common preventable cause of mortality in hospitalized medical patients. Despite rigorous randomized trials generating strong recommendations for anticoagulant use to prevent VTE, nearly 40% of medical patients receive inappropriate thromboprophylaxis. Knowledge-translation strategies are needed to bridge this gap.

Methods

We conducted a 16-week pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the proportion of medical patients that were appropriately managed for thromboprophylaxis (according to the American College of Chest Physician guidelines) within 24 hours of admission, through the use of a multicomponent knowledge-translation intervention. Our primary goal was to determine the feasibility of conducting this study on a larger scale. The intervention comprised clinician education, a paper-based VTE risk assessment algorithm, printed physicians’ orders, and audit and feedback sessions. Medical wards at six hospitals (representing clusters) in Ontario, Canada were included; three were randomized to the multicomponent intervention and three to usual care (i.e., no active strategies for thromboprophylaxis in place). Blinding was not used.

Results

A total of 2,611 patients (1,154 in the intervention and 1,457 in the control group) were eligible and included in the analysis. This multicomponent intervention did not lead to a significant difference in appropriate VTE prophylaxis rates between intervention and control hospitals (appropriate management rate odds ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.50, 1.28; p = 0.36; intra-class correlation coefficient: 0.022), and thus was not considered feasible. Major barriers to effective knowledge translation were poor attendance by clinical staff at education and feedback sessions, difficulty locating preprinted orders, and lack of involvement by clinical and administrative leaders. We identified several factors that may increase uptake of a VTE prophylaxis strategy, including local champions, support from clinical and administrative leaders, mandatory use, and a simple, clinically relevant risk assessment tool.

Conclusions

Hospitals allocated to our multicomponent intervention did not have a higher rate of medical inpatients appropriately managed for thromboprophylaxis than did hospitals that were not allocated to this strategy.     

Dual equipoise shared decision making: definitions for decision and behaviour support interventions

Background

In the experience of health professionals, it appears that interacting with peers in the workplace fosters learning and information sharing. Informal groups and networks present good opportunities for information exchange. Communities of practice (CoPs), which have been described by Wenger and others as a type of informal learning organization, have received increasing attention in the health care sector; however, the lack of uniform operating definitions of CoPs has resulted in considerable variation in the structure and function of these groups, making it difficult to evaluate their effectiveness.

Objective

To critique the evolution of the CoP concept as based on the germinal work by Wenger and colleagues published between 1991 and 2002.

Discussion

CoP was originally developed to provide a template for examining the learning that happens among practitioners in a social environment, but over the years there have been important divergences in the focus of the concept. Lave and Wenger's earliest publication (1991) centred on the interactions between novices and experts, and the process by which newcomers create a professional identity. In the 1998 book, the focus had shifted to personal growth and the trajectory of individuals' participation within a group (i.e., peripheral versus core participation). The focus then changed again in 2002 when CoP was applied as a managerial tool for improving an organization's competitiveness.

Summary

The different interpretations of CoP make it challenging to apply the concept or to take full advantage of the benefits that CoP groups may offer. The tension between satisfying individuals' needs for personal growth and empowerment versus an organization's bottom line is perhaps the most contentious of the issues that make CoPs difficult to cultivate. Since CoP is still an evolving concept, we recommend focusing on optimizing specific characteristics of the concept, such as support for members interacting with each other, sharing knowledge, and building a sense of belonging within networks/teams/groups. Interventions that facilitate relationship building among members and that promote knowledge exchange may be useful for optimizing the function of these groups.