Health Science Questions - Essay Example

? Health Science Questions Question The nature of the profession makes it difficult to distinct clinical decision errors. On most occasions, medical practitioners use their instincts when observing their patients. The diagnosis process in some cases requires excessive observation of the patients. In doing this, the paramedics observe the signs and symptoms of the alleged disease, additionally; they rely on their patient’s description to gain knowledge of their feelings. These make it easier for paramedics to make diagnostic mistakes and further make it more difficult to establish whether the decisional errors are professional or intentional. Observational skills are taught in school, paramedics are therefore professional observers a fact. However, life experiences and advancement in age make the observational skills more susceptible to impairment especially when no follow up training is carried out (Rajkomar & Dhaliwal, 2011). This makes doctor and nurses capable of making decisional mistakes yet attribute the mistakes to their professions. In addition, paramedics in most cases ask how their patients feel and base their preliminary diagnosis on the description of their patients. It is impossible to begin tests without the basic knowledge of the patient’s feelings (Xu et al, 2012). This thus makes the patient description very important. However, most patients how poor description abilities a fact that make doctors rely on their personal intuitions to comprehend their patients’ descriptions. They make most of their professional decisions in trying to establish the link between their patients’ description and the actual diagnosis thereby making it more difficult to distinguish the extent of the mistakes. Question 2 Intuitive clinical reasoning is indeed more reliable than the analytical method. The two differ right from their provision of the diagnosis process a point in which the reliability of the intuitive reasoning emanate. Clinical reasoning relies mostly on pattern recognitions. Under this, the method alludes to the fact that the patient is allowed as much time as possible to describe how he or she feels. In the numerous words they say, the paramedic draws a relationship between the description of the feelings the patient describes and the most possible form of infection or diseases (Coderre & Mandin, 2003). Every disease especially the most common such as malaria, dysentery and pneumonia have very distinct features and causes discomfort in very specific parts of the body. The doctor therefore bases his or her preliminary diagnosis on this description and proceeds to carry out scientific tests to determine the authenticity of the claims by the patient. This is more realistic than analysis of patient presentation as fostered by the analytical method. Analysis is more prone to personal biases, which may result in more decision mistakes thereby deriving all authenticity from the diagnostic process. Intuitive clinical reasoning further relies on the efficacy of the diagnostic method, the method puts the paramedic at liberty of making decisions and being accountable for the decisions, he or she makes (Bendall & Morrison, 2009). This type of diagnosis puts the doctor in control and therefore capable of applying his or her own additional skills in ensuring the success of the diagnosis process. This is a motivational tool more likely capable of improving productivity by making the work environment more challenging for the paramedics. The freedom does not only enhance innovation but also promotes efficiency in the paramedics. This makes the process more reliable than the analytical method. The analytical method has clearly elaborated method of diagnosis, this makes it more difficult for the doctor to implement since it requires recognition of every stage of the diagnosis process failure of which results in a diagnostic mistake (Sibbald & Cavalcanti, 2011). The most important aspect of the intuitive clinical reasoning is that it puts the paramedics at liberty of using whichever diagnostic method they deem fit provided they attain efficacy of their diagnosis. The method is more realistic since every doctor has a preference of the numerous methods owing to their mental capacities. It thus becomes derogative to bind a doctor to a universal method most of which he or she may not have adequate recognition. This makes the diagnosis process more susceptible to observational errors and personal judgment. The freedom to choose makes the doctor use the most appropriate diagnosis method in which he or she has adequate information thereby improving the efficacy of the diagnosis process (Eva & Hatala, 2007). Question 3 From every perspective, clinical reasoning is indeed a bounded process. This implies that the reasoning process follows a strict guideline that influences the decisions of the reasoning. Paramedics are at liberty to employ their intuitions in the decision making process, however, the liberty has a limitation on the numerous diagnosis methodologies that the doctors should have knowledge of. Medicine is a complex profession that takes years to accomplish, within the collages and medical schools, paramedics are taught the diversities of medical needs. They learn the different aspects of medicine and more interesting is the fact that they later specialize based on their interest in the various components of the medicine. The practice therefore becomes binding for the specialization point of the study (Mamede &Schmidt, 2007). Following the specialization, a practitioner makes decisions only on his or her area of specialization this makes it impossible for a dentist to diagnose any other patient. The practice of a dentist is therefore bound to the practices of dentistry and so are the operations of other numerous paramedics in the field today. The skills of the practitioner are limited to the specific area of specialization in this professional bondage. However, this bondage improves the worth of the diagnosis and the treatment process. There are different diseases all of which a single person may never have adequate knowledge of, specialization therefore makes one concentrate in one field and amass as much knowledge about the practice as possible thereby increasing their worth and the correctness of their decisions (Jensen, Croskerry & Travers, 2009). However, they have basic knowledge of the numerous other fields to make them capable of offering a preliminary assessment of a situation that requires medical assistance. Furthermore, the diagnostic reasoning is further limited to the different diagnostic methods; paramedics have different methods of diagnosing a patient. They further have the liberty of choosing from the multiple diagnostic methods as fostered in the intuitive clinical reasoning but the implementation of the diagnostic method follows the unique specifications of the method as elaborated in the professional books. The most modern trend allows for intuitive reasoning, this is arguably the most effective reasoning (Pelaccia, Tardif, thereby & Charlin, 2011). However, this is also bound by the fact that the reasoning revolves around deciding which method to use among the numerous previously existing and universally accepted methods. Medical practitioners have no audacity to try a unique diagnostic or test method if not only in the scientific laboratories. All the method preexist and the simply have to choose from them. They thus apply the freedom of choice but it is evident the freedom is limited and bound to the acceptable modes of practice. Bibliography Coderre, S. & H. Mandin, et al., 2003, "Diagnostic reasoning strategies and diagnostic success." Medical Education 37(8): 695-703. Bendall, J & Morrison A., 2009, ‘Clinical Judgement’ in Paramedics in Australia Contemporary challenges of practice, eds. P O’Meara & C Grbich, Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest, NSW. Eva, K. W. & Hatala,R.M. et al., 2007, "Teaching from the clinical reasoning literature: combined reasoning strategies help novice diagnosticians overcome misleading information." Medical Education 41(12): 1152-1158. Ferreira, A. P. R. B., Ferreira, R. F., Rajgor, D., Shah, J., Menezes, A., & Pietrobon, R., 2010, "Clinical reasoning in the real world is mediated by bounded rationality: implications for diagnostic clinical practice guidelines". PloS one, 5(4), e10265. Jensen, J. L., Croskerry, P., & Travers, A. H., 2009, "Consensus on Paramedic clinical decision making during high-acuity emergency calls: results of a Canadian Delphi study". BMC emergency medicine, 9(1), 17. Mamede, S. & H. G. Schmidt, et al., 2007, "Breaking down automaticity: case ambiguity and the shift to reflective approaches in clinical reasoning." Medical Education 41(12): 1185 1192. Pelaccia, T., Tardif, J., Triby, E., & Charlin, B., 2011, "An analysis of clinical reasoning through a recent and comprehensive approach: the dual-process theory". Medical education online, 16. Rajkomar, A. & Dhaliwal G., 2011, “Improving diagnostic reasoning to improve patient safety." Perm J 15(3): 68-73. Sibbald, M. and Cavalcanti, R. B., 2011, "The biasing effect of clinical history on physical examination diagnostic accuracy." Medical Education 45(8): 827-834. Xu, T., Xu, J., Yu, X., Ma, S., & Wang, Z., 2012, "Clinical decision-making by the emergency department resident physicians for critically ill patients". Frontiers of medicine, 6(1), 89 93. Read More