• Aucun résultat trouvé

Multimorbidity and clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: a qualitative study

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Partager "Multimorbidity and clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: a qualitative study"

Copied!
2
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Article

Reference

Multimorbidity and clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: a qualitative study

RITZ, Claire, et al.

Abstract

Despite the high prevalence of patients suffering from multimorbidity, the clinical reasoning processes involved during the longitudinal management are still sparse. This study aimed to investigate what are the different characteristics of the clinical reasoning process clinicians use with patients suffering from multimorbidity, and to what extent this clinical reasoning differs from diagnostic reasoning.

RITZ, Claire, et al . Multimorbidity and clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: a qualitative study. Family medicine and community health , 2021, vol. 9, no. 4, p. e000798

DOI : 10.1136/fmch-2020-000798 PMID : 34556495

PMCID : PMC8461689

Available at:

http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:155713

Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version.

1 / 1

(2)

Semi-structured interview guide

1. Overall, how do you use clinical reasoning when dealing with chronic management of patients suffering from multimorbidity?

2. In your daily practice, can you describe your clinical reasoning when managing these multimorbid patients whose diagnosis you already know?

3. Which steps would you say are involved when it comes to your clinical reasoning processes?

4. According to you, what are the main issues related to this “type” of clinical reasoning?

5. Could you describe what are the differences between the clinical reasoning used when managing chronic patients with longitudinal follow-up and the clinical reasoning used to identify a diagnosis?

6. Which processes seem simple to you, in this “type” of clinical reasoning in your experience?

7. And what are the difficulties?

8. What would be the risks of error in such clinical reasoning? At which steps of the reasoning more precisely would you be more likely to make reasoning errors, in your opinion?

9. Being a GP, what would you need to improve your clinical reasoning when it comes to patients suffering from multimorbidity?

10. What do you think the medical students would need to improve this type of reasoning?

BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance

Supplemental material placed on this supplemental material which has been supplied by the author(s) Fam Med Com Health

doi: 10.1136/fmch-2020-000798 :e000798.

9 2021;

Fam Med Com Health , et al.

Ritz C

Références

Documents relatifs

We find evidence for correspondence with postulate U1, which states that updating with the new fact must ensure that the new fact is a consequence of the update.. We find evidence

Patients aged 18–80 years with ≥3 chronic conditions were referred to the Telemedicine IMPACT Plus intervention; a nurse and patient planned a multi-provider case conference during

Three themes emerged in the analysis: creating new per- spectives on care for patients with multimorbidity by sharing knowledge, skills and attitudes; the shift from a consultant

Results: Previous literature and liaison with the European Pathways Association resulted in five criteria being used to define a clinical pathway: (1) the intervention was a

For example, they are needed to represent in OWL-DL an ‘hemisphere’ as an anatomical entity whose direct parts are lobes, each part being of a distinct type (i.e. frontal

This study aimed to evaluate how estimates of physical health- related quality of life vary in individuals with multimorbidity depending on the length of the list of

determinant for each condition in an individual with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bladder cancer, and intractable sinusitis, the patient is still considered to

These strategies will stimu- late the development of clinical reasoning skills on a daily basis, calling on both the resident and the super- visor to articulate