| Summary: | I wonder why sometimes we are able to rapidly recognize patterns of disease presentation, formulate a speedy diagnostic closure, and go on with a treatment plan. On the other hand sometimes we proceed studing in deep our patient in an analytic, slow and rational way of decison making. Why decisions sometimes can be intuitive, while sometimes we have to proceed in a rigorous way? What is the “back ground noise” and the “signal to noise ratio” of presenting sintoms? What is the risk in premature labeling or “closure” of a patient? When is it useful the “cook-book” approach in clinical decision making? The Emergency Department is a natural laboratory for the study of error” stated an author. Many studies have focused on the occurrence of errors in medicine, and in hospital practice, but the ED with his unique operating characteristics seems to be a uniquely errorprone environment. That's why it is useful to understand the underlying pattern of thinking that can lead us to misdiagnosis. The general knowledge of thought processes gives the psysician awareness an the ability to apply different tecniques in clinical decision making and to recognize and avoid pitfalls.
|
|---|
