Dataset Information

Decision-making and referral processes for patients with motor neurone disease: a qualitative study of GP experiences and evaluation of a new decision-support tool.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The diagnosis of motor neurone disease (MND) is known to be challenging and there may be delay in patients receiving a correct diagnosis. This study investigated the referral process for patients who had been diagnosed with MND, and whether a newly-developed tool (The Red Flags checklist) might help General Practitioners (GPs) in making referral decisions.

Methods

We carried out interviews with GPs who had recently referred a patient diagnosed with MND, and interviews/surveys with GPs who had not recently referred a patient with suspected MND. We collected data before the Red Flags checklist was introduced; and again one year later. We analysed the data to identify key recurring themes.

Results

Forty two GPs took part in the study. The presence of fasciculation was the clinical feature that most commonly led to consideration of a potential MND diagnosis. GPs perceived that their role was to make onward referrals rather than attempting to make a diagnosis, and delays in correct diagnosis tended to occur at the specialist level. A quarter of participants had some awareness of the newly-developed tool; most considered it useful, if incorporated into existing systems.

Conclusions

While fasciculation is the most common symptom associated with MND, other bulbar, limb or respiratory features, together with progression should be considered. There is a need for further research into how decision-support tools should be designed and provided, in order to best assist GPs with referral decisions. There is also a need for further work at the level of secondary care, in order that referrals made are re-directed appropriately.

SUBMITTER: Baxter S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5422976 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Gastrostomy decision making is a complicated, multifaceted process for people with motor neuron disease (MND). This study explored demographic and disease-related factors that may impact on gastrostomy uptake; and reasons why people with MND accepted or declined gastrostomy, with a focus on how perceptions of swallowing and nutrition may influence decision making. DESIGN:Prospective, cross sectional, mixed methods. SETTING:An Australian multidisciplinary, specialty MND Service. PARTICIPANTS:33 patients were recommended gastrostomy by the treating medical specialist. 16 of 33 were invited to participate in the prospective decision making study; of whom 10 provided informed consent. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Demographic and disease-related factors contributing to uptake are described. A stepped approach was applied to gain a comprehensive understanding of why people with MND accept or decline gastrostomy. Instruments included standardised assessments, nutrition survey and semistructured interview. Data were collected at three separate appointments, spanning a 3-week period. RESULTS:Gastrostomy uptake was 73% following medical specialist recommendation. Participants took days, weeks or months to consider their preferences, with lengthy hospital waiting times for the procedure. Gender, site of onset and rate of disease progression were observed to contribute to uptake. Age and symptom duration did not. Integration of quantitative and qualitative data suggests that patient perceptions of swallowing and nutrition contribute to gastrostomy acceptance; however, the decision making process is heterogeneous and these factors may not be the sole or primary reasons for acceptance. Other reported factors included: reducing carer burden, improving quality of life, increasing independence, continuing participation in social outings and gaining control. CONCLUSIONS:Future research may give greater insight into how healthcare organisations can better facilitate gastrostomy decision making, to meet the needs of people living with MND. Larger, prospective, multisite studies may build on these findings to better inform clinical guidelines and minimise the impacts of delayed gastrostomy insertion.

Project description:BackgroundThe general paediatricians and primary care physicians sometimes face immense difficulty in referral judgements regarding which infantile hemangiomas (IHs) require referrals and when is the appropriate time to refer IHs for treatment. This resulted in the treatment being delayed beyond IHs' critical timeframe. The Infantile Hemangioma Referral Score (IHReS) has been recently developed, with the aim to solve this problem.ObjectivesThe objective of the present study is to evaluate the reliability of IHReS and to assess the possibility of using this instrument in our country where a similar problem of delaying treatment of IHs is currently existing.MethodsThe present study was a prospective, cross-sectional study. Thirteen selected clinical cases were used to assess the reliability of IHReS among physicians who may have had the chance to deal with patients with IHs. The target physicians across the country were asked to participate in the study via an online platform (Google Forms) to decide whether to refer patients with IHs for treatment or observe. There were 3 steps of assessment: step 1, usual practice evaluation; step 2, using IHReS; step 3, retesting by using IHReS.ResultsSubstantial agreement was observed after using IHReS (step 2) for interrater reliability, with Fleiss' Kappa values of 0.80 and 0.78 among IH experts and non-expert physicians, respectively. Regarding repeatability, in the test-retest assessments, Cohen's Kappa coefficient values revealed almost perfect agreement in intrarater repeatability for both experts and non-expert physicians (1.00).ConclusionIHReS is a simple, easy-to-assess tool for non-expert physicians. The benefit in the increase of interrater agreement was found in both IH experts and non-expert physicians. It has had the reliability to be used in making referral decisions regarding patients with IH for treatment among Thai physicians. Using IHReS can improve clinical outcomes by identifying which patient needs early intervention to minimise the possible complications.

Project description:ObjectivePatient values and preferences are an important component to decision making when tradeoffs exist that impact quality of life, such as tradeoffs between stroke prevention and hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) contemplating anticoagulant therapy. Our objective is to describe the development of an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) to assist the process of integrating patients' preferences into this decision.Materials and methodsCHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED were used to calculate risks for stroke and hemorrhage. We developed a Markov decision analytic model as a computational engine to integrate patient-specific risk for stroke and hemorrhage and individual patient values for relevant outcomes in decisions about anticoagulant therapy.ResultsIndividual patient preferences for health-related outcomes may have greater or lesser impact on the choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy, depending upon the balance of patient-specific risks for ischemic stroke and major bleeding. These factors have been incorporated into patient-tailored booklets which, along with an informational video, were developed through an iterative process with clinicians and patient focus groups.Key limitationsCurrent risk prediction models for hemorrhage, such as the HAS-BLED, used in the AFGuST, do not incorporate all potentially significant risk factors. Novel oral anticoagulant agents recently approved for use in the United States, Canada, and Europe have not been included in the AFGuST. Rather, warfarin has been used as a conservative proxy for all oral anticoagulant therapy.ConclusionsWe present a proof of concept that a patient-tailored decision-support tool could bridge the gap between guidelines and practice by incorporating individual patient's stroke and bleeding risks and their values for major bleeding events and stroke to facilitate a shared decision making process. If effective, the AFGuST could be used as an adjunct to published guidelines to enhance patient-centered conversations about the anticoagulation management.