Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-02T13:05:06.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - Medical Decision-Making in the Emergency Department: Balancing the Patient’s Health with the Clinician’s Perception of Risk

from Section 1 - Decision-Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

By
Michael Weinstock
Edited by
Alex Koyfman  and
Brit Long
Alex Koyfman
Affiliation:
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Brit Long
Affiliation:
San Antonio Military Medical Center
Get access

Summary

This delicate balancing act plays out across the country each day with practice variation regarding ED testing, management, and disposition decisions. Consider the HEART score, where ACEP guidelines recommend an “acceptable miss rate” of 1–2%, specifically stating that trying to get lower than this may cause patient harm from false positive results. However, emergency clinicians have a different take, with surveys prior to the ACEP statement showing we are only comfortable with a miss rate of 0.1% or 0.01%. There are many such examples where the “cure” might be worse than the “disease,” including the PECARN criteria for pediatric head injury with the decision rule approaching a 100% sensitivity for a “clinically important traumatic brain injury,” which is a level so low that it is thought to be lower than the risk of CT-induced malignancies resulting from the radiation associated with testing.

Type
Chapter
Information
Emergency Medicine Thinker
Pearls for the Frontlines
 , pp. 124 - 138
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

American College of Emergency Physicians Clinical Policies Subcommittee (Writing Committee) on Suspected Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes; Tomaszewski, CA, Nestler, D, et al. Clinical policy: critical issues in the evaluation and management of emergency department patients with suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. Ann Emerg Med. 2018;72:e65–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Than, MP, Herbert, M, Flaws, D, et al. What is an acceptable risk of major adverse cardiac event in chest pain patients soon after discharge from the Emergency Department? A clinical survey. Int J Cardiol. 2013;166(3):752–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinstock, MD, Pallaci, M, Mattu, A, et al. Most clinicians are still not comfortable sending chest pain patients home with a very low risk of 30-day major adverse cardiac event (MACE). J Urgent Care Med. 2021; 15(5):17–21.Google Scholar
Kuppermann, N, Holmes, JF, Dayan, PS, et al. Identification of children at very low risk of clinically-important brain injuries after head trauma: a prospective cohort study Lancet. 2009;374(9696):1160–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61558-0 [published correction appears in Lancet. 2014 Jan 25;383(9914):308].CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schonfeld, D, Bressan, S, Da Dalt, L, et al. Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network head injury clinical prediction rules are reliable in practice. Arch Dis Child. 2014;99(5):427–31. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2013-305004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kline, JA, Mitchell, AM, Kabrhel, C, Richman, PB, Courtney, DM. Clinical criteria to prevent unnecessary diagnostic testing in emergency department patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2004;2(8):1247–55. https://doi.org/.10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.00790.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kline, JA, Courtney, DM, Kabrhel, C, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria. J Thromb Haemost. 2008;6(5):772–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.02944.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, JT. A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care. J Patient Saf. 2013;9(3):122–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ong, S, Nakase, J, Moran, GJ, et al. Antibiotic use for emergency department patients with upper respiratory infections: prescribing practices, patient expectations, and patient satisfaction. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;50(3):213–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.03.026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fenton, JJ, Jerant, AF, Bertakis, KD, Franks, P. The cost of satisfaction: a national study of patient satisfaction, health care utilization, expenditures, and mortality. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):405–11. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2011.1662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinstock, MB, Mattu, A, Hess, EP. How do we balance the long-term health of a patient with the short-term risk to the physician? J Emerg Med. 2017;53(4):583–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.06.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinstock, MB, Finnerty, NM, Pallaci, M. Time to move on: redefining chest pain outcomes. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8(12):e012542. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.012542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alter, SM, Eskin, B, Allegra, JR. Diagnosis of aortic dissection in emergency department patients is rare. West J Emerg Med. 2015;16(5):629–31. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2015.6.25752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohle, R, Mc Isaac, S, Perry, JJ. A simple intervention to reduce your chance of missing an acute aortic dissection. CJEM. 2019;21(5):618–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/cem.2019.1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sakhnini, A, Bisharat, N. Practice behavior of emergency department physicians caring for patients with chest pain. Am J Emerg Med. 2019;37(6):1210–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2018.11.039.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pines, JM, Isserman, JA, Szyld, D, et al. The effect of physician risk tolerance and the presence of an observation unit on decision making for ED patients with chest pain. Am J Emerg Med. 2010;28(7):771–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2009.03.019.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulrow, C, Lucey, C, Farnett, L. Discriminating causes of dyspnea through the clinical examination. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8:383–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickson, GB, Federspiel, CF, Pichert, JW, et al. Patient complaints and malpractice risk. JAMA. 2002;287(22):2951–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.22.2951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, GA, Redberg, RF. Addressing overuse of medical services one decision at a time. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(7):1092–3. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jena, AB, Seabury, S, Lakdawalla, D, Chandra, A. Malpractice risk according to physician specialty. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(7):629–36. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1012370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seabury, SA, Chandra, A, Lakdawalla, DN, Jena, AB. On average, physicians spend nearly 11 percent of their 40-year careers with an open, unresolved malpractice claim. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(1):111–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlson, JN, Foster, KM, Pines, JM, et al. Provider and practice factors associated with emergency physicians’ being named in a malpractice claim. Ann Emerg Med. 2018;71(2):157–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.06.023 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.06.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, KE, Parikh, PD, Miller, KC, Zonfrillo, MR. Emergency department and urgent care medical malpractice claims 2001–15. West J Emerg Med. 2021;22(2):333–8. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.9.48845.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kanzaria, HK, Hoffman, JR, Probst, MA, et al. Emergency physician perceptions of medically unnecessary advanced diagnostic imaging. Acad Emerg Med. 2015;22(4):390–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Studdert, DM, Mello, MM, Sage, WM, et al. Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment. JAMA. 2005;293(21):2609–17. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.21.2609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wassie, M, Lee, MS, Sun, BC, et al. Single vs serial measurements of cardiac troponin level in the evaluation of patients in the emergency department with suspected acute myocardial infarction. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(2):e2037930. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37930.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Backus, BE, Body, R, Weinstock, MB. Troponin testing in the emergency department – when 2 become 1. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(2):e210329. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Probst, MA, Kanzaria, HK, Schoenfeld, EM, et al. Shared decision making in the emergency department: a guiding framework for clinicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2017;70(5):688–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.03.063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×