3.8 Article

Severity, Irritability, Nature, Stage, and Stability (SINSS): A clinical perspective

Journal

JOURNAL OF MANUAL & MANIPULATIVE THERAPY
Volume 29, Issue 5, Pages 297-309

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2021.1919284

Keywords

Physical examination; intervention; vigor; extent

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of the SINSS construct in clinical practice can help mitigate clinical reasoning errors. By defining and applying the terms in a systematic way, clinicians can gain a better understanding of the patient's condition and symptoms, reducing the likelihood of errors in clinical practice.
Clinical reasoning errors in health-care can be mitigated with the use of systematic strategies and tools. One of these strategies is the SINSS construct, an acronym for Severity, Irritability, Nature, Stage, and Stability. The construct of SINSS appears in several textbooks and peer-reviewed articles. However, it has been inconsistently defined and applied in clinical practice. In this clinical perspective, the terms of the SINSS construct are defined in detail and their application to clinical practice is discussed. Current research showing the application of SINSS as a whole in clinical practice and educational settings is also presented. Recommendations for future application of SINSS are provided to advance the study of clinical reasoning and help minimize diagnostic, prognostic, and interventional clinical errors. The systematic use of SINSS allows the clinician to gain a thorough understanding of the patient's condition and symptoms, which can lead to a well-tolerated and appropriately tailored physical examination and intervention. Additionally, the proper use of this construct can result in more optimal patient outcomes, as well as provide a structure for the mentor and learner in helping uncover errors in the learner's clinical reasoning process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available