Back to Search
Start Over
Cascades of Care After Incidental Findings in a US National Survey of Physicians.
- Source :
-
JAMA network open [JAMA Netw Open] 2019 Oct 02; Vol. 2 (10), pp. e1913325. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Oct 02. - Publication Year :
- 2019
-
Abstract
- Importance: Incidental findings on screening and diagnostic tests are common and may prompt cascades of testing and treatment that are of uncertain value. No study to date has examined physician perceptions and experiences of these cascades nationally.<br />Objective: To estimate the national frequency and consequences of cascades of care after incidental findings using a national survey of US physicians.<br />Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based survey study using data from a 44-item cross-sectional, online survey among 991 practicing US internists in a research panel representative of American College of Physicians national membership. The survey was emailed to panel members on January 22, 2019, and analysis was performed from March 11 to May 27, 2019.<br />Main Outcomes and Measures: Physician report of prior experiences with cascades, features of their most recently experienced cascade, and perception of potential interventions to limit the negative consequences of cascades.<br />Results: This study achieved a 44.7% response rate (376 completed surveys) and weighted responses to be nationally representative. The mean (SE) age of respondents was 43.4 (0.7) years, and 60.4% of respondents were male. Almost all respondents (99.4%; percentages were weighted) reported experiencing cascades, including cascades with clinically important and intervenable outcomes (90.9%) and cascades with no such outcome (94.4%). Physicians reported cascades caused their patients psychological harm (68.4%), physical harm (15.6%), and financial burden (57.5%) and personally caused the physicians wasted time and effort (69.1%), frustration (52.5%), and anxiety (45.4%). When asked about their most recent cascade, 33.7% of 371 respondents reported the test revealing the incidental finding may not have been clinically appropriate. During this most recent cascade, physicians reported that guidelines for follow-up testing were not followed (8.1%) or did not exist to their knowledge (53.2%). To lessen the negative consequences of cascades, 62.8% of 376 respondents chose accessible guidelines and 44.6% chose decision aids as potential solutions.<br />Conclusions and Relevance: The survey findings indicate that almost all respondents had experienced cascades after incidental findings that did not lead to clinically meaningful outcomes yet caused harm to patients and themselves. Policy makers and health care leaders should address cascades after incidental findings as part of efforts to improve health care value and reduce physician burnout.
- Subjects :
- Adult
Cross-Sectional Studies
Decision Support Techniques
Female
Guideline Adherence statistics & numerical data
Humans
Internal Medicine methods
Male
Middle Aged
Occupational Stress etiology
Patient Care adverse effects
Patient Care psychology
Physicians psychology
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Practice Patterns, Physicians' statistics & numerical data
Surveys and Questionnaires
Unnecessary Procedures adverse effects
Unnecessary Procedures economics
Unnecessary Procedures psychology
Incidental Findings
Internal Medicine statistics & numerical data
Patient Care statistics & numerical data
Physicians statistics & numerical data
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 2574-3805
- Volume :
- 2
- Issue :
- 10
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- JAMA network open
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 31617925
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13325