TY - JOUR
T1 - Self-reported test ordering practices among Canadian internal medicine physicians and trainees
T2 - A multicenter cross-sectional survey
AU - Bodley, Thomas
AU - Kwan, Janice L.
AU - Matelski, John
AU - Darragh, Patrick J.
AU - Cram, Peter
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Author(s).
PY - 2019/11/8
Y1 - 2019/11/8
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Behavioural science
KW - Diagnostic investigation
KW - Hospital medicine
KW - Quality improvement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074723062&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074723062&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12913-019-4639-3
DO - 10.1186/s12913-019-4639-3
M3 - Review article
C2 - 31703686
AN - SCOPUS:85074723062
SN - 1472-6963
VL - 19
JO - BMC Health Services Research
JF - BMC Health Services Research
IS - 1
M1 - 820
ER -