Physician Evaluation after Medical Errors: Does Having a Computer Decision Aid Help or Hurt in Hindsight?

Mark V. Pezzo and Stephanie P. Pezzo
Additional contact information
Mark V. Pezzo: 140 7th Ave, South, DAV 258, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL 33701; pezzo@stpt.usf.edu
Stephanie P. Pezzo: College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL

Medical Decision Making, 2006, vol. 26, issue 1, 48-56

Abstract: Objective. The authors examined whether physicians’ use of computerized decision aids affects patient satisfaction and/or blame for medical outcomes. Method. Experiment 1: Fiftynine undergraduates read about a doctor who made either a correct or incorrect diagnosis and either used a decision aid or did not. All rated the quality of the doctor's decision and the likelihood of recommending the doctor. Those receiving a negative outcome also rated negligence and likelihood of suing. Experiment 2: One hundred sixty-six medical students and 154 undergraduates read negative-outcome scenarios in which a doctor either agreed with the aid, heeded the aid against his own opinion, defied the aid in favor of his own opinion, or did not use a decision aid. Subjects rated doctor fault and competence and the appropriateness of using decision aids in medicine. Medical students made judgments for themselves and for a layperson. Results. Experiment 1: Using a decision aid caused a positive outcome to be rated less positively and a negative outcome to be rated less negatively. Experiment 2: Agreeing with or heeding the aid was associated with reduced fault, whereas defying the aid was associated with roughly the same fault as not using one at all. Medical students were less harsh than undergraduates but accurately predicted undergraduate's responses. Conclusion. Agreeing with or heeding a decision aid, but not defying it, may reduce liability after an error. However, using an aid may reduce favorability after a positive outcome.

Keywords: computerassisted diagnosis; decision support systems; clinical; decision support techniques; diagnostic errors; malpractice; medical errors; medical informatics; patient satisfaction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X05282644 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:1:p:48-56

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X05282644

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().