Dataset Information

Portuguese Family Physicians' Awareness of Diagnostic and Laboratory Test Costs: A Cross-Sectional Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Physicians' ability to make cost-effective decisions has been shown to be affected by their knowledge of health care costs. This study assessed whether Portuguese family physicians are aware of the costs of the most frequently prescribed diagnostic and laboratory tests.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in a representative sample of Portuguese family physicians, using computer-assisted telephone interviews for data collection. A Likert scale was used to assess physician's level of agreement with four statements about health care costs. Family physicians were also asked to estimate the costs of diagnostic and laboratory tests. Each physician's cost estimate was compared with the true cost and the absolute error was calculated.

Results

One-quarter (24%; 95% confidence interval: 23%-25%) of all cost estimates were accurate to within 25% of the true cost, with 55% (95% IC: 53-56) overestimating and 21% (95% IC: 20-22) underestimating the true actual cost. The majority (76%) of family physicians thought they did not have or were uncertain as to whether they had adequate knowledge of diagnostic and laboratory test costs, and only 7% reported receiving adequate education. The majority of the family physicians (82%) said that they had adequate access to information about the diagnostic and laboratory test costs. Thirty-three percent thought that costs did not influence their decision to order tests, while 27% were uncertain.

Conclusions

Portuguese family physicians have limited awareness of diagnostic and laboratory test costs, and our results demonstrate a need for improved education in this area. Further research should focus on identifying whether interventions in cost knowledge actually change ordering behavior, in identifying optimal methods to disseminate cost information, and on improving the cost-effectiveness of care.

SUBMITTER: Sa L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4565683 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Portuguese Family Physicians' Awareness of Diagnostic and Laboratory Test Costs: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Sá Luísa L Costa-Santos Cristina C Teixeira Andreia A Couto Luciana L Costa-Pereira Altamiro A Hespanhol Alberto A Santos Paulo P Santos Paulo P Martins Carlos C

PloS one 20150910 9

<h4>Background</h4>Physicians' ability to make cost-effective decisions has been shown to be affected by their knowledge of health care costs. This study assessed whether Portuguese family physicians are aware of the costs of the most frequently prescribed diagnostic and laboratory tests.<h4>Methods</h4>A cross-sectional study was conducted in a representative sample of Portuguese family physicians, using computer-assisted telephone interviews for data collection. A Likert scale was used to asse ...[more]

PMID: 26356625

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To characterise the test ordering pattern in Northern Portugal and to investigate the influence of context-related factors, analysing the test ordered at the level of geographical groups of family physicians and at the level of different healthcare organisations. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTING:Northern Primary Health Care, Portugal. PARTICIPANTS:Records about diagnostic and laboratory tests ordered from 2035 family physicians working at the Northern Regional Health Administration, who served approximately 3.5?million Portuguese patients, in 2014. OUTCOMES:To determine the 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests in the Northern Regional Health Administration; to identify the presence and extent of variations in the 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests between the Groups of Primary Care Centres and between health units; and to study factors that may explain these variations. RESULTS:The 20 most ordered diagnostic and laboratory tests almost entirely comprise laboratory tests and account for 70.9% of the total tests requested. We can trace a major pattern of test ordering for haemogram, glucose, lipid profile, creatinine and urinalysis. There was a significant difference (P<0.001) in test orders for all tests between Groups of Primary Care Centres and for all tests, except glycated haemoglobin (P=0.06), between health units. Generally, the Personalised Healthcare Units ordered more than Family Health Units. CONCLUSIONS:The results from this study show that the most commonly ordered tests in Portugal are laboratory tests, that there is a tendency for overtesting and that there is a large variability in diagnostic and laboratory test ordering in different geographical and organisational Portuguese primary care practices, suggesting that there may be considerable potential for the rationalisation of test ordering. The existence of Family Health Units seems to be a strong determinant in decreasing test ordering by Portuguese family physicians. Approaches to ensuring more rational testing are needed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based medicine (EBM) aims to assist physicians in making medical decisions based on the integration of the current best evidence, clinical expertise, and patients' values. Extensive research has been conducted regarding physicians' awareness, attitudes, barriers, and knowledge about EBM. In Croatia, there is a lack of research on this topic, especially among family physicians (FP). The aim of this study was to assess the awareness, attitudes, barriers, and knowledge about EBM among FPs in Croatia after six years of educational activities organized and provided by Cochrane Croatia. METHODS:In a cross-sectional study, conducted in 2016, we offered to FPs in Croatia a printed or online validated questionnaire to assess attitudes toward and barriers when considering the use of EBM, awareness about sources of evidence, and their level of understanding of evidence-based medicine terminology. The physicians were approached during mandatory continuing medical education courses and through their professional associations. We compared results from two groups of physicians, one with family medicine specialization and the other without. RESULTS:295 (14%) of all officially registered FPs responded to the questionnaire. Respondents were very positive toward the promotion and usage of EBM. 160 (67%) indicated that they did not have access to the Cochrane Library. The majority reported lack of time available for finding evidence (80%), and patients' unrealistic expectations that influence doctors' choice of treatment (72%). Between the two groups of physicians, more family medicine specialists reported time restrictions for finding evidence. The highest level of EBM terminology understanding was reported for study design terms, and the lowest for statistical terms. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated that FPs in Croatia had very positive attitudes toward the use of EBM, they agreed that EBM improves patient care, and they estimated that more than two thirds of their practice is EBM-based. Compared to the results of the first assessment of physicians in 2010, there was some increase in the level of EBM awareness among FPs. However, to further increase the quality of EBM practice in Croatia better access to EBM sources and further educational activities are needed.

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore the awareness and practice of clinical research integrity among Japanese physicians.DesignA nationwide cross-sectional study conducted in March 2020.SettingAll hospitals in Japan.ParticipantsPhysicians aged <65 years who work at hospitals participated in clinical research over the past 5 years. The sample was stratified according to geographical location and subspecialty, and 1100 physicians were proportionally selected.Primary and secondary outcome measuresKnowledge and awareness of research integrity.ResultsAmong the 1100 participants, 587 (53%) had the experience of being the first author, 299 (27%) had been co-authors only and 214 (19%) had no authorship. A total of 1021 (93%) had experienced learning research integrity, and 555 (54%) became aware of research integrity. The experience of learning about research integrity was highest among those with first authorship (95%) and lowest among those without authorship (89%) (p=0.003). The majority of participants learnt about research integrity for passive reasons such as it being 'required by the institution' (57%) or it being 'required to obtain approval of institutional review board (IRB)' (30%). Potentially inappropriate research behaviours were observed in participants, with 11% indulging in copying and pasting for writing the paper, 11% for gifted authorship and 5.8% for the omission of IRB approval. Factors significantly associated with copying and pasting were being below 40 years old (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.05 to 3.26), being the first presenter (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.57) or having passive reasons for learning research integrity (OR: 2.96; 95% CI: 1.57 to 5.59). Furthermore, gifted authorship was significantly associated with being a co-author only (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.87) and having passive reasons for learning about research integrity (OR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.03 to 3.12).ConclusionsMost physicians conducting clinical research have learnt about research integrity, but potentially inappropriate research behaviours are associated with passive reasons for learning.

Project description:Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used to treat acid-related disorders. Their appropriate use depends on the correct indications from the clinician. Owing to the high incidence of use and misuse, PPIs have been identified as an essential pharmacological class for developing deprescribing recommendations. Therefore, assessing physicians' knowledge and practice regarding PPI usage is critical for paving the way toward targeted recommendations and efforts. Objective: This study aimed to assess Syrian physicians' perceptions of proton pump inhibitors adverse effects, their benefit in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) prophylaxis, and how these perceptions are related to PPI prescription practice. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed using a web-based questionnaire distributed among Syrian physicians in internal medicine between 28 November and 23 December 2022. The questionnaire assessed perceptions and experiences of PPIs, concerns about specific adverse effects, and their effectiveness for UGIB prophylaxis, in addition to the different scenarios used to determine the best practice for appropriate treatment to manage minimal, mild, moderate, and high-risk UGIB patients. Results: A total of 473 participants completed the questionnaire, with median age ±SD was (28.46 ± 4.58), and most participants (83.3%) were residents. Approximately half of the participants (45.5%) agreed that discussion assistance was provided to continue or terminate PPIs properly. Only 8.9% were very familiar with published evidence of PPI adverse effects. Bone weakening and vitamin B12 deficiency were the most frequently reported side effects (81.8% and 79.7%, respectively). However, dementia (0.4%) and mortality (1.9%) were the least reported adverse effects. More than half of the participants (64%) perceived using PPIs to prevent upper GI bleeding. Non-trainee physicians were less knowledgeable about appropriate GERD management than resident physicians (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The study showed a gap between Syrian physicians' perceptions and practices regarding PPI use, which necessitates spreading awareness of updated guidelines for PPI usage and their side effects.

Project description:BackgroundIn Canada, family physicians are permitted to charge patient fees for administrative services that are not covered by the public health insurance program, such as prescription renewals outside of an office visit, and completion of forms and sick notes. The objective of this study was to estimate the proportion of Ontario family physicians who offer various fee structures (i.e., à la carte, annual block fees for all uninsured services rendered or no charge) for uninsured administrative services.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional telephone survey conducted from April to July 2019 of a random sample of family physicians licensed to practise in Ontario. We excluded physicians with missing contact information or additional specialties, or whose primary practice was outside of Ontario, with a walk-in clinic, with an emergency department, or with an organization that cared for a specific population (e.g., nursing home) or did not provide care (e.g., insurance company). We categorized the geographic location of practices as large urban centre (population > 100 000), small to medium centre (population 1000-99 999) or rural area. We calculated survey weights to account for nonresponse and to ensure representativeness of the sample by geographic area and payment model.ResultsAmong the 221 physicians who met the inclusion criteria, the telephone was not answered at 42 practices, and the contact information was incorrect for 13, resulting in a sample of 166 physicians (response rate 75.1%). The majority of practices reported that they charged fees for uninsured services: 97 (58.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 50.6-65.8) charged à la carte, and 33 (20.3%, 95% CI 14.8-27.3) offered patients the option to pay an annual block fee; 19 (11.4%, 95% CI 7.4-17.3) charged no fees. Fee structures varied by geographic area but not physician payment model.InterpretationThe use of à la carte and annual block fees for uninsured administrative services was commonly reported by a sample of Ontario family physicians. Further research is needed to examine the prevalence of patient payment of fees for uninsured services, patient and physician perceptions of fees, and concordance with regulatory guidance.

Project description:BackgroundMany primary care patients receive both medical and chiropractic care; however, interprofessional relations between physicians and chiropractors are often suboptimal which may adversely affect care of shared patients. We surveyed Canadian family physicians in 2010 to explore their attitudes towards chiropractic and re-administered the same survey a decade later to explore for changes in attitudes.MethodsA 50-item survey administered to a random sample of Canadian family physicians in 2010, and again in 2019, that inquired about demographic variables, knowledge and use of chiropractic. Imbedded in our survey was a 20-item chiropractic attitude questionnaire (CAQ); scores could range from 0 to 80 with higher scores indicating more positive attitudes toward chiropractic. We constructed a multivariable regression model to explore factors associated with CAQ scores.ResultsAmong eligible physicians, 251 of 685 in 2010 (37% response rate) and 162 of 2429 in 2019 (7% response rate) provided a completed survey. Approximately half of respondents (48%) endorsed a positive impression of chiropractic, 27% were uncertain, and 25% held negative views. Most respondents (72%) referred at least some patients for chiropractic care, mainly due to patient request or lack of response to medical care. Most physicians believed that chiropractors provide effective therapy for some musculoskeletal complaints (84%) and disagreed that chiropractic care was beneficial for non-musculoskeletal conditions (77%). The majority agreed that chiropractic care was a useful supplement to conventional care (65%) but most respondents (59%) also indicated that practice diversity among chiropractors presented a barrier to interprofessional collaboration. In our adjusted regression model, attitudes towards chiropractic showed trivial improvement from 2010 to 2019 (0.31 points on the 80-point CAQ; 95%CI 0.001 to 0.62). More negative attitudes were associated with older age (- 1.55 points for each 10-year increment from age 28; 95%CI - 2.67 to - 0.44), belief that adverse events are common with chiropractic care (- 1.41 points; 95% CI - 2.59 to - 0.23) and reported use of the research literature (- 6.04 points; 95% CI - 8.47 to - 3.61) or medical school (- 5.03 points; 95% CI - 7.89 to - 2.18) as sources of knowledge on chiropractic. More positive attitudes were associated with endorsing a relationship with a specific chiropractor (5.24 points; 95% CI 2.85 to 7.64), family and friends (4.06 points; 95% CI 1.53 to 6.60), or personal treatment experience (4.63 points; 95% CI 2.14 to 7.11) as sources of information regarding chiropractic.ConclusionsAlthough generally positive, Canadian family physicians' attitudes towards chiropractic are diverse, and most physicians felt that practice diversity among chiropractors was a barrier to interprofessional collaboration.

Project description:Background: Although annual influenza vaccination is recommended for healthcare providers (HCPs), vaccination rate among HCPs in India is generally low. This cross-sectional survey was conducted to evaluate physicians' awareness, attitude, and current practices toward influenza vaccination in high-risk groups in India. Methods: The survey was performed in June-July 2020, wherein consulting physicians, pulmonologists, diabetologists, obstetricians/gynecologists, or cardiologists across 14 cities completed a 39-item questionnaire consisting of 3 sections, one each on awareness, attitude, and practice patterns. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the study results. Statistical analysis was performed for comparison of subgroups by physician specialty, city of practice (metro/non-metro), and zone of practice (north/south/east/west). Level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: In all, 780 physicians completed the survey. Of these, 3.97, 53.08, and 42.95% had high, medium, and low level of awareness about influenza/influenza vaccination, respectively. Statistically significant (p < 0.05) between-group differences were found by physician specialty and zone of practice. In terms of attitude toward vaccination of high-risk group subjects, only 0.9% physicians were "extremely concerned," while the majority (92.56%) were "quite concerned" and 6.54% were a "little concerned," with no reported significant differences between different subgroups. With regard to practice patterns, 82.82% of physicians offered influenza vaccines to their patients, 32.69% vaccinated 10-25% of patients per month, and 38.85% required and offered the vaccine to their office staff. Physicians' reasons for not prescribing influenza vaccines to patients included fear of side effects (16.54%), cost (15.64%), lack of awareness about availability (15.38%), absence of belief that it is beneficial (14.36%), history of side effects (13.46%), and patients' fear of needles (11.28%). Conclusion: These findings suggest the need to implement educational strategies among physicians to enhance their awareness about influenza vaccination and improve their attitudes and current practices toward influenza vaccination especially in high-risk groups in India.

Dataset Information

Portuguese Family Physicians' Awareness of Diagnostic and Laboratory Test Costs: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Portuguese Family Physicians' Awareness of Diagnostic and Laboratory Test Costs: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets