Interpretation and management of genetic test results by Canadian family physicians: a multiple choice survey of performance.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Skinner SJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8241956 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMissed test results are a cause of medical error. Few studies have explored test result management in the inpatient setting.ObjectiveTo examine test result management practices of general internal medicine providers in the inpatient setting, examine satisfaction with practices, and quantify self-reported delays in result follow-up.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsGeneral internal medicine attending physicians and trainees (residents and medical students) at three Canadian teaching hospitals.Main measuresMethods used to track test results; satisfaction with these methods; personal encounters with results respondents "wish they had known about sooner."Key resultsWe received surveys from 33/51 attendings and 99/108 trainees (response rate 83%). Only 40.9% of respondents kept a record of all tests they order, and 50.0% had a system to ensure ordered tests were completed. Methods for tracking test results included typed team sign-out lists (40.7%), electronic health record (EHR) functionality (e.g., the electronic "inbox") (38.9%), and personal written or typed lists (14.8%). Almost all trainees (97.9%) and attendings (81.2%) reported encountering at least one test result they "wish they had known about sooner" in the past 2 months (p = 0.001). A higher percentage of attendings kept a record of tests pending at hospital discharge compared to trainees (75.0% vs. 35.7%, p < 0.001), used EHR functionality to track tests (71.4% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.004), and reported higher satisfaction with result management (42.4% vs. 12.1% satisfied or very satisfied, p < 0.001).ConclusionsCanadian physicians report an array of problems managing test results in the inpatient setting. In the context of prior studies from the outpatient setting, our study suggests a need to develop interventions to prevent missed results and avoid potential patient harms.
| S-EPMC6318178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic pain affects one in five Canadians, and opioids continue to be prescribed to 12.3% of the Canadian population. A survey of family physicians was conducted in 2010 as a baseline prior to the release of the Canadian Opioid Guideline. We repeated the same survey with minor modifications to reflect the updated 2017 opioid prescribing guideline. The online survey was distributed in all provinces and territories in both English and French. There were 265 responses from May 2018 to October 2019, 55% of respondents were male, 16% had advanced training in pain management, 51% had more than 20 years in practice, 54% wrote five or fewer prescriptions of opioids per month, and 58% were confident in their skills in prescribing opioids. Of the 11 knowledge questions, only two were correctly selected by more than 80% of the respondents. Twenty-nine physicians (11%) do not prescribe opioids, and the main factor affecting their decisions were concerns about long-term adverse effects and lack of evidence for effectiveness of opioids in chronic noncancer pain. Of the 12 guideline-concordant practices, only two were performed regularly by 90% or more of the respondents: explain potential harms of long-term opioid therapy and beginning dose of less than 50 mg of morphine equivalent daily. This survey represents a small proportion of family physicians in Canada and its generalizability is limited. However, we identified a number of opioid-related and guideline-specific gaps, as well as barriers and enablers to prescribing opioids and adhering to the guideline.
| S-EPMC7602479 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8442384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Over-testing is a recognized problem, but clinicians usually lack information about their personal test ordering volumes. In the absence of data, clinicians rely on self-perception to inform their test ordering practices. In this study we explore clinician self-perception of diagnostic test ordering intensity. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of inpatient General Internal Medicine (GIM) attending physicians and trainees at three Canadian teaching hospitals. We collected information about: self-reported test ordering intensity, perception of colleagues test ordering intensity, and importance of clinical utility, patient comfort, and cost when ordering tests. We compared responses of clinicians who self-identified as high vs low utilizers of diagnostic tests, and attending physicians vs trainees. RESULTS:Only 15% of inpatient GIM clinicians self-identified as high utilizers of diagnostic tests, while 73% felt that GIM clinicians in aggregate ("others") order too many tests. Survey respondents identified clinical utility as important when choosing to order tests (selected by 94%), followed by patient comfort (48%) and cost (23%). Self-identified low/average utilizers of diagnostic tests were more likely to report considering cost compared to high utilizers (27% vs 5%, P = 0.04). Attending physicians were more likely to consider patient comfort (70% vs 41%, p = 0.01) and cost (42% vs 17%, p = 0.003) than trainees. CONCLUSIONS:In the absence of data, providers seem to recognize that over investigation is a problem, but few self-identify as being high test utilizers. Moreover, a significant percentage of respondents did not consider cost or patient discomfort when ordering tests. Our findings highlight challenges in reducing over-testing in the current era.
| S-EPMC6842191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are several methods to read skin prick test results in type-I allergy testing. A commonly used method is to characterize the wheal size by its 'average diameter'. A more accurate method is to scan the area of the wheal to calculate the actual size. In both methods, skin prick test (SPT) results can be corrected for histamine-sensitivity of the skin by dividing the results of the allergic reaction by the histamine control. The objectives of this study are to compare different techniques of quantifying SPT results, to determine a cut-off value for a positive SPT for histamine equivalent prick -index (HEP) area, and to study the accuracy of predicting cashew nut reactions in double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) tests with the different SPT methods.Data of 172 children with cashew nut sensitisation were used for the analysis. All patients underwent a DBPCFC with cashew nut. Per patient, the average diameter and scanned area of the wheal size were recorded. In addition, the same data for the histamine-induced wheal were collected for each patient. The accuracy in predicting the outcome of the DBPCFC using four different SPT readings (i.e. average diameter, area, HEP-index diameter, HEP-index area) were compared in a Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) plot.Characterizing the wheal size by the average diameter method is inaccurate compared to scanning method. A wheal average diameter of 3 mm is generally considered as a positive SPT cut-off value and an equivalent HEP-index area cut-off value of 0.4 was calculated. The four SPT methods yielded a comparable area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.85, 0.83 and 0.83, respectively. The four methods showed comparable accuracy in predicting cashew nut reactions in a DBPCFC.The 'scanned area method' is theoretically more accurate in determining the wheal area than the 'average diameter method' and is recommended in academic research. A HEP-index area of 0.4 is determined as cut-off value for a positive SPT. However, in clinical practice, the 'average diameter method' is also useful, because this method provides similar accuracy in predicting cashew nut allergic reactions in the DBPCFC.Trial number NTR3572.
| S-EPMC4763448 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundHealth checks can detect risk factors and initiate prevention of cardiovascular diseases but there is no consensus on how to communicate the results. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences of the general population for communicating health check results.MethodsA randomly selected sample of the Swedish population aged 40-70 years completed a discrete choice experiment survey that included questions on sociodemographics, lifestyle and health and 15 choice questions consisting of six attributes (written results, notification method, consultation time, waiting time, lifestyle recommendation and cost). Data were analyzed with a latent class analysis (LCA). Relative importance of the attributes and predicted uptake for several scenarios were estimated.ResultsIn the analysis, 432 individuals were included (response rate 29.6%). A three-class LCA model best fit the data. Cost was the most important attribute in all classes. Preferences heterogeneity was found for the other attributes; in Class 1, receiving consultation time and the written results were important, respondents in Class 2 dominated on costs and respondents in Class 3 found consultation time, waiting time and lifestyle recommendations to be important. Health literate respondents were more likely to belong to Class 3. The predicted uptake rates ranged from 7 to 88% for different health checks with large differences across the classes.ConclusionCost was most important when deciding whether to participate in a health check. Although cost was the most important factor, it is not sufficient to offer health checks free-of-charge if other requirements regarding how the test results are communicated are not in place; participants need to be able to understand their results.
| S-EPMC8357669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Genomic testing is increasingly performed in oncology, but concerns remain regarding the clinician's ability to interpret results. In the current study, the authors sought to determine the agreement between physicians and genomic annotators from the Precision Oncology Decision Support (PODS) team at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston regarding actionability and the clinical use of test results. METHODS:On a prospective protocol, patients underwent clinical genomic testing for hotspot mutations in 46 or 50 genes. Six months after sequencing, physicians received questionnaires for patients who demonstrated a variant in an actionable gene, investigating their perceptions regarding the actionability of alterations and clinical use of these findings. Genomic annotators independently classified these variants as actionable, potentially actionable, unknown, or not actionable. RESULTS:Physicians completed 250 of 288 questionnaires (87% response rate). Physicians considered 168 of 250 patients (67%) as having an actionable alteration; of these, 165 patients (98%) were considered to have an actionable alteration by the PODS team and 3 were of unknown significance. Physicians were aware of genotype-matched therapy available for 119 patients (71%) and 48 of these 119 patients (40%) received matched therapy. Approximately 46% of patients in whom physicians regarded alterations as not actionable (36 of 79 patients) were classified as having an actionable/potentially actionable mutation by the PODS team. However, many of these were only theoretically actionable due to limited trials and/or therapies (eg, KRAS). CONCLUSIONS:Physicians are aware of recurrent mutations in actionable genes on "hotspot" panels. As larger genomic panels are used, there may be a growing need for annotation of actionability. Decision support to increase awareness of genomically relevant trials and novel treatment options for recurrent mutations (eg, KRAS) also are needed. Cancer 2018;124:966-72. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC5821595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the knowledge gaps and need for continuing medical education (CME) resources for Canadian paediatric emergency department (PED) physician management of common tropical diseases.MethodsA cross-sectional survey study of Canadian PED was performed from May to July 2017 using the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) database.ResultsThe response rate was 56.4% (133/236). The mean performance on the case-based vignettes identifying clinical presentation of tropical illnesses ranged from 59.9% to 76.0%, with only 15.8% (n=21) to 31.1% (n=42) of participants scoring maximum points. Those who 'always' asked about fever performed better than those who only 'sometimes' asked (40.4% versus 23.8%). For management cases, the majority of the participants (59.4% to 89.5%) were able to interpret investigations; however, many were unsure of subsequent actions relating to initial treatment, discharge instructions, and reporting requirements. Many would consult infectious diseases (87.8% to 99.3%). Fifty-three per cent of the participants reported a low comfort level in diagnosing or managing these patients. They rated the importance of CME materials with a median of 50/100, via various modalities such as case studies (71.9%), emphasizing a need for PED-specific content.ConclusionThis study identified a knowledge gap in the recognition and management of pediatric tropical diseases by Canadian PED physicians. There is a need for formal CME materials to supplement physician practice.
| S-EPMC8077208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe objective of this report was to evaluate perceptions of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment and satisfaction with healthcare professional (HCP) communication among patients with PsA in Australia, compared with overall global perceptions.MethodsData were collected via a global and country-specific survey (The Harris Poll; November 2, 2017-March 12, 2018). Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years old, had been diagnosed with PsA > 1 year prior, had seen a rheumatologist or dermatologist within the past 12 months, and had previously received ≥ 1 conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Data reported by patients included baseline demographics, overall health, time since PsA diagnosis, PsA severity, satisfaction with current PsA medication and management, and experiences regarding communication with their HCP. Descriptive statistics were obtained.ResultsMost patients in Australia were very or somewhat satisfied with their PsA medication, and reported always or often taking their medication exactly as directed by their HCP. However, the majority still experienced symptoms, reported their overall health as poor or fair, and would change something about their PsA medication. While the majority of patients in Australia were satisfied with the communication with their HCP, most would prefer increased communication but some felt that asking too many questions would affect the quality of their care. Perceptions in Australia were similar to global perceptions.ConclusionsAlthough most patients with PsA in Australia were satisfied with their disease management and communication with their HCP, many still experienced symptoms, would change something about their PsA medication, and would prefer increased communication with their HCP.
| S-EPMC8217426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn some healthcare systems, it is common that patients address laboratory test centers directly without a physician's recommendation. This practice is widely spread in Russia with about 28% of patients who visiting laboratory test centers for diagnostics. This causes an issue when patients get no help from the physician in understanding the results. Computer decision support systems proved to efficiently solve a resource consuming task of interpretation of the test results. So, a decision support system can be implemented to rise motivation and empower the patients who visit a laboratory service without a doctor's referral.MethodsWe have developed a clinical decision support system for patients that solves a classification task and finds a set of diagnoses for the provided laboratory tests results. The Wilson and Lankton's assessment model was applied to measure patients' acceptance of the solution.ResultsA first order predicates-based decision support system has been implemented to analyze laboratory test results and deliver reports in natural language to patients. The evaluation of the system showed a high acceptance of the decision support system and of the reports that it generates.ConclusionsDetailed notification of the laboratory service patients with elements of the decision support is significant for the laboratory data management, and for patients' empowerment and safety.
| S-EPMC6053711 | biostudies-literature