Clinical Reasoning: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
m (edited the grammar)
Line 11: Line 11:
Clinical Reasoning is the process by which a therapist interacts with a patient, collecting information, generating and testing hypotheses, and determining optimal diagnosis and treatment based on the information obtained. It has been defined as “an inferential process used by practitioners to collect and evaluate data and to make judgments about the diagnosis and management of patient problems"<ref name="Higgs">Higgs J, Jones M. Clinical decision making and multiple problem spaces. In: Higgs J, Jones MA, Loftus S, Christensen N. Clinical reasoning in health professions. Amsterdam: Elsevier;2008. p. 4-19.</ref>  
Clinical Reasoning is the process by which a therapist interacts with a patient, collecting information, generating and testing hypotheses, and determining optimal diagnosis and treatment based on the information obtained. It has been defined as “an inferential process used by practitioners to collect and evaluate data and to make judgments about the diagnosis and management of patient problems"<ref name="Higgs">Higgs J, Jones M. Clinical decision making and multiple problem spaces. In: Higgs J, Jones MA, Loftus S, Christensen N. Clinical reasoning in health professions. Amsterdam: Elsevier;2008. p. 4-19.</ref>  


Clinical reasoning is “the sum of the thinking and decision-making processes associated with clinical practice”<ref name="Ed2004">Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. [http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/84/4/312 Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy]. Physical therapy. 2004;84(4):312-30.</ref><ref name="Higgs" />. During this process, the therapist analyses multiple variables contributing to the patient’s limited physical capacity (the ability to execute a task or action in a standard environment) and performance (what the patient can do in his or her own current environment). The key elements of the process include generation of hypotheses of factors assumed to underlie the limitations of physical capacity and performance and postulation of the magnitude of those factors. The therapist interacts with the patient and other persons involved in the patient care (family, other health care professionals) and guides the patient in finding meaningful goals and health management strategies<ref name="Atkinson">Atkinson HL, Nixon-Cave K. [http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/91/3/416.full.pdf A tool for clinical reasoning and reflection using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework and patient management model]. Physical therapy. 2011;91(3):416-30.</ref>. All decisions and actions need to be made in line with professional ethics and community expectations<ref name="Atkinson" />.
Clinical reasoning is “the sum of the thinking and decision-making processes associated with clinical practice”<ref name="Ed2004">Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. [http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/84/4/312 Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy]. Physical therapy. 2004;84(4):312-30.</ref><ref name="Higgs" />. During this process, the therapist analyses multiple variables contributing to the patient’s limited physical capacity (the ability to execute a task or action in a standard environment) and performance (what the patient can do in his or her own current environment). The key elements of the process include generation of hypotheses of factors assumed to underlie the limitations of physical capacity and performance and postulation of the magnitude of those factors. The therapist interacts with the patient and other persons involved in the patient's care (family, other health care professionals) and guides the patient in finding meaningful goals and health management strategies<ref name="Atkinson">Atkinson HL, Nixon-Cave K. [http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/91/3/416.full.pdf A tool for clinical reasoning and reflection using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework and patient management model]. Physical therapy. 2011;91(3):416-30.</ref>. All decisions and actions need to be made in line with professional ethics and community expectations<ref name="Atkinson" />.


The below 7 minute video is a good introduction to clinical reasoning
The below 7 minute video is a good introduction to clinical reasoning
Line 19: Line 19:
== Clinical Reasoning  ==
== Clinical Reasoning  ==


Clinical Reasoning is integral to physiotherapy practice. As a concept, clinical reasoning is quite a simple one however in practice, it is difficult and fraught with errors. The aim of clinical reasoning is to prevent misdirection <ref name="Jones">Jones, M. Clinical reasoning and pain. Manual Therapy. 1995; 1:17-24.</ref> A robust clinical reasoning process is vital so the threshold of suspicion of serious pathology is at an appropriate level<ref name="G+S2008" />. The way a therapist clinically reasons their findings can strongly influence how the case is interpreted. This has implications as to how the clinician views the red flags and gives weight to any red herrings presented therein <ref name="G+S2004">Greenhalgh, S. and Selfe, J. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222425308_Margaret_A_tragic_case_of_spinal_Red_Flags_and_Red_Herrings Margaret: a tragic case of spinal Red Flags and Red Herrings]. Physiotherapy. 2004; 90:73-76.</ref>.  
Clinical Reasoning is integral to physiotherapy practice. As a concept, clinical reasoning is quite a simple one; however in practice, it is difficult and fraught with errors. The aim of clinical reasoning is to prevent misdirection <ref name="Jones">Jones, M. Clinical reasoning and pain. Manual Therapy. 1995; 1:17-24.</ref> A robust clinical reasoning process is vital so the threshold of suspicion of serious pathology is at an appropriate level<ref name="G+S2008" />. The way a therapist clinically reasons their findings can strongly influence how the case is interpreted. This has implications as to how the clinician views the red flags and gives weight to any red herrings presented therein <ref name="G+S2004">Greenhalgh, S. and Selfe, J. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222425308_Margaret_A_tragic_case_of_spinal_Red_Flags_and_Red_Herrings Margaret: a tragic case of spinal Red Flags and Red Herrings]. Physiotherapy. 2004; 90:73-76.</ref>.  


The most common form of clinical reasoning within the physiotherapy profession is hypothetico-deductive reasoning<ref name="Doody">Doody C, McAteer M. Clinical reasoning of expert and novice physiotherapists in an outpatient orthopaedic setting. Physiotherapy. 2002;88 (5): 258-268.</ref>. Within hypothetico-deductive reasoning, the clinician gains initial clues in regards to the patients problem (from the subjective assessment) which forms initial hypotheses in the therapists mind. Further data is collected in the objective assessment, which may confirm or negate the hypotheses. Continual hypothesis generation may occur during management and reassessment<ref name="Ed2004" />.  
The most common form of clinical reasoning within the physiotherapy profession is hypothetico-deductive reasoning<ref name="Doody">Doody C, McAteer M. Clinical reasoning of expert and novice physiotherapists in an outpatient orthopaedic setting. Physiotherapy. 2002;88 (5): 258-268.</ref>. Within hypothetico-deductive reasoning, the clinician gains initial clues in regards to the patient's problem (from the subjective assessment), which forms the initial hypotheses in the therapists mind. Further data is collected in the objective assessment, which may confirm or negate the hypotheses. Continual hypothesis generation may occur during management and reassessment<ref name="Ed2004" />.  


[[Clinical Reflection|Reflection]] after the initial assessment and also after the subsequent sessions will help the therapist to recognise patterns and their clinical reasoning process will improve<ref name="Jones" /><ref name="G+S2008">Greenhalgh, S. Red Flags, and clinical Presentation Mapping. Available from: https://macpweb.org/home/index.php?m=file&amp;f=873. (accessed 21 October 2008)</ref>.
[[Clinical Reflection|Reflection]] after the initial assessment and also after the subsequent sessions will help the therapist to recognise patterns and their clinical reasoning process will improve<ref name="Jones" /><ref name="G+S2008">Greenhalgh, S. Red Flags, and clinical Presentation Mapping. Available from: https://macpweb.org/home/index.php?m=file&amp;f=873. (accessed 21 October 2008)</ref>.
Line 27: Line 27:
== Process of Clinical Reasoning  ==
== Process of Clinical Reasoning  ==


Clinical reasoning should begin as soon as the therapist meets the patient as their behaviour can inform the therapists clinical reasoning<ref name="G+S2008" />. There should be ongoing data collection which should not stop at the end of the assessment to aid this process. A hypothetico-deductive model of clinical reasoning can be seen in Figure 1.  
Clinical reasoning should begin as soon as the therapist meets the patient, as their behaviour can inform the therapist's clinical reasoning<ref name="G+S2008" />. There should be ongoing data collection which should not stop at the end of the assessment to aid this process. A hypothetico-deductive model of clinical reasoning can be seen in Figure 1.  


[[Image:Clinical reasoning.png|Figure 1: Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning  (Jones,1995).]]  
[[Image:Clinical reasoning.png|Figure 1: Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning  (Jones,1995).]]  
Line 33: Line 33:
Figure 1: A Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning<ref name="Jones" />&nbsp;<br>  
Figure 1: A Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning<ref name="Jones" />&nbsp;<br>  


The therapist may be able to ascertain quickly that something is wrong with the patient due to the subjective and objective assessment along wither their subsequent clinical reasoning. The data gathered over sessions should be collated to best inform the therapist. This will contribute to the therapists evolving concept of the patients’ problem<ref name="G+S2008" /><ref name="Jones" />.  
The therapist may be able to ascertain quickly that something is wrong with the patient due to the subjective and objective assessment along wither their subsequent clinical reasoning. The data gathered over sessions should be collated to best inform the therapist. This will contribute to the therapist's evolving concept of the patient's problem<ref name="G+S2008" /><ref name="Jones" />.  


== Pattern Recognition  ==
== Pattern Recognition  ==
Line 39: Line 39:
Pattern recognition is an important part of clinical reasoning however, this will be limited in students and newly qualified physiotherapists<ref name="Jones" /><ref name="Doody" />.  
Pattern recognition is an important part of clinical reasoning however, this will be limited in students and newly qualified physiotherapists<ref name="Jones" /><ref name="Doody" />.  


Knowledge is also an important consideration. The newly qualified therapist is expected to have many more potential hypotheses in comparison to a experienced therapist<ref name="Jones" />. There is suggested to be differences in novice and expert therapists in the process of clinical reasoning<ref name="Doody" />. Although largely similar, novice physiotherapists have to go through a longer process of clinical reasoning compared to expert therapists due to lack of knowledge in comparison; and less experience in pattern recognition. Figure 2 demonstrates the clinical reasoning process of expert therapists (with at least 3 years of experience) and novice therapists (with under three years’ experience or students)<ref name="Doody" />.  
Knowledge is also an important consideration. The newly qualified therapist is expected to have many more potential hypotheses in comparison to a experienced therapist<ref name="Jones" />. There is suggested to be differences in novice and expert therapists in the process of clinical reasoning<ref name="Doody" />. Although largely similar, novice physiotherapists have to go through a longer process of clinical reasoning compared to expert therapists due to lack of knowledge in comparison and less experience in pattern recognition. Figure 2 demonstrates the clinical reasoning process of expert therapists (with at least 3 years of experience) and novice therapists (with under three years’ experience or students)<ref name="Doody" />.  


[[Image:Diff in clinical reasoning.png]]  
[[Image:Diff in clinical reasoning.png]]  
Line 47: Line 47:
== Patient Involvement in the Clinical Reasoning Process  ==
== Patient Involvement in the Clinical Reasoning Process  ==


The patient should be an integral part of the clinical reasoning process as this can help the clinician to form hypotheses and lead towards the review of the outcome post physiotherapy intervention<ref name="Jones" />(See Figure 3).  
The patient should be an integral part of the clinical reasoning process, as this can help the clinician to form hypotheses and lead towards the review of the outcome post physiotherapy intervention<ref name="Jones" />(See Figure 3).  


[[Image:Patient involve.png]]  
[[Image:Patient involve.png]]  

Revision as of 22:33, 13 January 2021

This article or area is currently under construction and may only be partially complete. Please come back soon to see the finished work! (13/01/2021)

Introduction[edit | edit source]

Clinical Reasoning is the process by which a therapist interacts with a patient, collecting information, generating and testing hypotheses, and determining optimal diagnosis and treatment based on the information obtained. It has been defined as “an inferential process used by practitioners to collect and evaluate data and to make judgments about the diagnosis and management of patient problems"[1]

Clinical reasoning is “the sum of the thinking and decision-making processes associated with clinical practice”[2][1]. During this process, the therapist analyses multiple variables contributing to the patient’s limited physical capacity (the ability to execute a task or action in a standard environment) and performance (what the patient can do in his or her own current environment). The key elements of the process include generation of hypotheses of factors assumed to underlie the limitations of physical capacity and performance and postulation of the magnitude of those factors. The therapist interacts with the patient and other persons involved in the patient's care (family, other health care professionals) and guides the patient in finding meaningful goals and health management strategies[3]. All decisions and actions need to be made in line with professional ethics and community expectations[3].

The below 7 minute video is a good introduction to clinical reasoning

[4]


Clinical Reasoning[edit | edit source]

Clinical Reasoning is integral to physiotherapy practice. As a concept, clinical reasoning is quite a simple one; however in practice, it is difficult and fraught with errors. The aim of clinical reasoning is to prevent misdirection [5] A robust clinical reasoning process is vital so the threshold of suspicion of serious pathology is at an appropriate level[6]. The way a therapist clinically reasons their findings can strongly influence how the case is interpreted. This has implications as to how the clinician views the red flags and gives weight to any red herrings presented therein [7].

The most common form of clinical reasoning within the physiotherapy profession is hypothetico-deductive reasoning[8]. Within hypothetico-deductive reasoning, the clinician gains initial clues in regards to the patient's problem (from the subjective assessment), which forms the initial hypotheses in the therapists mind. Further data is collected in the objective assessment, which may confirm or negate the hypotheses. Continual hypothesis generation may occur during management and reassessment[2].

Reflection after the initial assessment and also after the subsequent sessions will help the therapist to recognise patterns and their clinical reasoning process will improve[5][6].

Process of Clinical Reasoning[edit | edit source]

Clinical reasoning should begin as soon as the therapist meets the patient, as their behaviour can inform the therapist's clinical reasoning[6]. There should be ongoing data collection which should not stop at the end of the assessment to aid this process. A hypothetico-deductive model of clinical reasoning can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning (Jones,1995).

Figure 1: A Hypothetico-deductive model of Clinical Reasoning[5] 

The therapist may be able to ascertain quickly that something is wrong with the patient due to the subjective and objective assessment along wither their subsequent clinical reasoning. The data gathered over sessions should be collated to best inform the therapist. This will contribute to the therapist's evolving concept of the patient's problem[6][5].

Pattern Recognition[edit | edit source]

Pattern recognition is an important part of clinical reasoning however, this will be limited in students and newly qualified physiotherapists[5][8].

Knowledge is also an important consideration. The newly qualified therapist is expected to have many more potential hypotheses in comparison to a experienced therapist[5]. There is suggested to be differences in novice and expert therapists in the process of clinical reasoning[8]. Although largely similar, novice physiotherapists have to go through a longer process of clinical reasoning compared to expert therapists due to lack of knowledge in comparison and less experience in pattern recognition. Figure 2 demonstrates the clinical reasoning process of expert therapists (with at least 3 years of experience) and novice therapists (with under three years’ experience or students)[8].

Diff in clinical reasoning.png

Figure 2: Difference in clinical reasoning between expert and novice therapists[8].

Patient Involvement in the Clinical Reasoning Process[edit | edit source]

The patient should be an integral part of the clinical reasoning process, as this can help the clinician to form hypotheses and lead towards the review of the outcome post physiotherapy intervention[5](See Figure 3).

Patient involve.png

Figure 3: Patient involvement in the clinical reasoning process[5].

Approaches[edit | edit source]

Hypothesis-Oriented Algorithm for Clinicians II (HOAC II)

International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)

Resources[edit | edit source]

Physical Therapy Clinical Reasoning and Reflection Tool - aims to integrate the ICF framework into the patient management model while incorporating the hypothesis-driven basis of CDM models

getPTsmart - Tool to engage in the teaching and learning of clinical reasoning in a contemporary, time-independent environment that serves as a link between the classroom and clinical practice.

References[edit | edit source]

  1. 1.0 1.1 Higgs J, Jones M. Clinical decision making and multiple problem spaces. In: Higgs J, Jones MA, Loftus S, Christensen N. Clinical reasoning in health professions. Amsterdam: Elsevier;2008. p. 4-19.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy. Physical therapy. 2004;84(4):312-30.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Atkinson HL, Nixon-Cave K. A tool for clinical reasoning and reflection using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework and patient management model. Physical therapy. 2011;91(3):416-30.
  4. Rahul Patwari Clinical reasoning Available from:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DzeF8hCNb8&app=desktop (last accessed 3.3.2020)
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Jones, M. Clinical reasoning and pain. Manual Therapy. 1995; 1:17-24.
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Greenhalgh, S. Red Flags, and clinical Presentation Mapping. Available from: https://macpweb.org/home/index.php?m=file&f=873. (accessed 21 October 2008)
  7. Greenhalgh, S. and Selfe, J. Margaret: a tragic case of spinal Red Flags and Red Herrings. Physiotherapy. 2004; 90:73-76.
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Doody C, McAteer M. Clinical reasoning of expert and novice physiotherapists in an outpatient orthopaedic setting. Physiotherapy. 2002;88 (5): 258-268.