Search

Introduction: Therapeutic decision-making often involves weighing several treatment options on the basis of, among other things, the disease profile, patient characteristics but also prescriber-specific factors. This study investigated the factors influencing therapeutic decision-making among prescribers and explores how these factors differ between healthcare professionals., Methods: This Q-methodology study involved 37 participants from different medical backgrounds, including physicians, dentists, midwives, physician assistants and advanced nurse practitioners from various intra- and extramural settings in the Netherlands. Participants ranked 55 factors on their importance for medication prescribing, and factor analysis was used to identify distinct prescriber profiles. These profiles were subsequently enriched using qualitative data derived from post-sorting interviews., Results: Four prescriber profiles were identified that explained 59% of the study variance: pragmatic contextual, guideline oriented, experience driven and vulnerability focused. Several factors were ranked differently in each profile. The pragmatic contextual profile emphasized patient context and risk prevention, the guideline-oriented profile adhered to clinical guidelines, the experience-driven profile relied on clinical experience and patient-centred communication, and the vulnerability-focused profile prioritized personalized care for specific patient groups., Conclusion: This study sheds light on the diverse factors influencing prescriber decision-making in medical practice. By identifying four prescriber profiles, it reveals the complexity and diversity in how prescribers balance guidelines, clinical experience and patient-specific considerations in their practice. These findings offer direction for developing educational and policy initiatives to enhance the quality of prescribing, ultimately improving patient outcomes., (© 2025 The Author(s). British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: Despite efforts to improve undergraduate clinical pharmacology & therapeutics (CPT) education, prescribing errors are still made regularly. To improve CPT education and daily prescribing, it is crucial to understand how therapeutic reasoning works. Therefore, the aim of this study was to gain insight into the therapeutic reasoning process., Methods: A narrative literature review has been performed for literature on cognitive psychology and diagnostic and therapeutic reasoning., Results: Based on these insights, The European Model of Therapeutic Reasoning has been developed, building upon earlier models and insights from cognitive psychology. In this model, it can be assumed that when a diagnosis is made, a primary, automatic response as to what to prescribe arises based on pattern recognition via therapy scripts (type 1 thinking). At some point, this response may be evaluated by the reflective mind (using metacognition). If it is found to be incorrect or incomplete, an alternative response must be formulated through a slower, more analytical and deliberative process, known as type 2 thinking. Metacognition monitors the reasoning process and helps a person to form new therapy scripts after they have chosen an effective therapy. Experienced physicians have more and richer therapy scripts, mostly based on experience and enabling conditions, instead of textbook knowledge, and therefore their type 1 response is more often correct., Conclusion: Because of the important role of metacognition in therapeutic reasoning, more attention should be paid to metacognition in CPT education. Both trainees and teachers should be aware of the possibility to monitor and influence these cognitive processes. Further research is required to investigate the applicability of these insights and the adaptability of educational approaches to therapeutic reasoning., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: Medical case vignettes play a crucial role in medical education, yet they often fail to authentically represent diverse patients. Moreover, these vignettes tend to oversimplify the complex relationship between patient characteristics and medical conditions, leading to biased and potentially harmful perspectives among students. Displaying aspects of patient diversity, such as ethnicity, in written cases proves challenging. Additionally, creating these cases places a significant burden on teachers in terms of labour and time. Our objective is to explore the potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted computer-generated clinical cases to expedite case creation and enhance diversity, along with AI-generated patient photographs for more lifelike portrayal., Methods: In this study, we employed ChatGPT (OpenAI, GPT 3.5) to develop diverse and inclusive medical case vignettes. We evaluated various approaches and identified a set of eight consecutive prompts that can be readily customized to accommodate local contexts and specific assignments. To enhance visual representation, we utilized Adobe Firefly beta for image generation., Results: Using the described prompts, we consistently generated cases for various assignments, producing sets of 30 cases at a time. We ensured the inclusion of mandatory checks and formatting, completing the process within approximately 60 min per set., Conclusions: Our approach significantly accelerated case creation and improved diversity, although prioritizing maximum diversity compromised representativeness to some extent. While the optimized prompts are easily reusable, the process itself demands computer skills not all educators possess. To address this, we aim to share all created patients as open educational resources, empowering educators to create cases independently., (© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Purpose: Up to 22% of older patients who visit the emergency department (ED) have a return visit within 30 days. To achieve patient-centered care for this group at the ED it is important to involve the patient perspective and strive to provide the best possible experience. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the experiences and perspectives of older patients from initial to return ED visit by mapping their patient journey., Methods: We performed a qualitative patient journey study with 13 patients of 70 years and older with a return ED visit within 30 days who presented at the Amsterdam UMC, a Dutch academic hospital. We used semi-structured interviews focusing on the patient experience during their journey and developed a conceptual framework for coding., Results: Our sample consisted of 13 older patients with an average age of 80 years, and 62% of them were males. The framework contained a timeline of the patient journey with five chronological main themes, complemented with an 'experience' theme, these were divided into 34 subthemes. Health status, social system, contact with the general practitioner, aftercare, discharge and expectations were the five main themes. The experiences regarding these themes differed greatly between patients. The two most prominent subthemes were waiting time and discharge communication, which were mostly related to a negative experience., Conclusions: This study provides insight into the experiences and perspectives of older patients from initial to return ED visit. The two major findings were that lack of clarity regarding waiting times and suboptimal discharge communication contributed to negative experiences. Recommendations regarding waiting time (i.e. a two-hour time out at the ED), and discharge communication (i.e. checklist for discharge) could contribute to a positive ED experience and thereby potentially improve patient-centered care., (© 2021. The Author(s).)