Individual utilisation thresholds and exploring how GPs' knowledge of their patients affects diagnosis: a qualitative study in primary care

Determinants of referral for suspected coronary artery disease: a qualitative study based on decision thresholds

BACKGROUND

Chest pain is a frequent consultation issue in primary care, with coronary artery disease (CAD) being a serious potential cause. Primary care physicians (PCPs) assess the probability for CAD and refer patients to secondary care if necessary. Our aim was to explore PCPs' referral decisions, and to investigate determinants which influenced those decisions.

METHODS

PCPs working in Hesse, Germany, were interviewed in a qualitative study. We used 'stimulated recall' with participants to discuss patients with suspected CAD. With a sample size of 26 cases from nine practices we reached inductive thematic saturation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed by inductive-deductive thematic content analysis. For the final interpretation of the material, we used the concept of decision thresholds proposed by Pauker and Kassirer.

RESULTS

PCPs reflected on their decisions for or against a referral. Aside from patient characteristics determining disease probability, we identified general factors which can be understood as influencing the referral threshold. These factors relate to the practice environment, to PCPs themselves and to non-diagnostic patient characteristics. Proximity of specialist practice, relationship with specialist colleagues, and trust played a role. PCPs sometimes felt that invasive procedures were performed too easily. They tried to steer their patients through the system with the intent to avoid over-treatment. Most PCPs were unaware of guidelines but relied on informal local consensus, largely influenced by specialists. As a result, PCPs gatekeeping role was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

We could identify a large number of factors that impact referral for suspected CAD. Several of these factors offer possibilities to improve care at the clinical and system level. The threshold model proposed by Pauker and Kassirer was a useful framework for this kind of data analysis.

Primary medical care continuity and patient mortality: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A 2018 review into continuity of care with doctors in primary and secondary care concluded that mortality rates are lower with higher continuity of care.

AIM

This association was studied further to elucidate its strength and how causative mechanisms may work, specifically in the field of primary medical care.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review of studies published in English or French from database and source inception to July 2019.

METHOD

Original empirical quantitative studies of any design were included, from MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, OpenGrey, and the library catalogue of the New York Academy of Medicine for unpublished studies. Selected studies included patients who were seen wholly or mostly in primary care settings, and quantifiable measures of continuity and mortality.

RESULTS

Thirteen quantitative studies were identified that included either cross-sectional or retrospective cohorts with variable periods of follow-up. Twelve of these measured the effect on all-cause mortality; a statistically significant protective effect of greater care continuity was found in nine, absent in two, and in one effects ranged from increased to decreased mortality depending on the continuity measure. The remaining study found a protective association for coronary heart disease mortality. Improved clinical responsibility, physician knowledge, and patient trust were suggested as causative mechanisms, although these were not investigated.

CONCLUSION

This review adds reduced mortality to the demonstrated benefits of there being better continuity in primary care for patients. Some patients may benefit more than others. Further studies should seek to elucidate mechanisms and those patients who are likely to benefit most. Despite mounting evidence of its broad benefit to patients, relationship continuity in primary care is in decline - decisive action is required from policymakers and practitioners to counter this.

Beyond accuracy: hidden motives in diagnostic testing

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic decision-making is usually disease-focussed and intended to examine the patient's medical condition accurately. But diagnostic interventions may serve further purposes that are not yet fully understood.

OBJECTIVE

To explore GPs' diagnostic behaviour not related to confirming or refuting a specific disease.

METHODS

We recorded 295 primary care consultations in 12 practices. One hundred thirty-four consultations comprised at least one diagnostic episode. GPs were asked to reflect on their own diagnostic thinking in interviews for every single case. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were applied with focus on the GPs' cognitive processes during diagnostic decision-making.

RESULTS

Primary care physicians clearly stated that they requested some tests for other reasons than diagnosing disease. A feeling of uncertainty stimulated diagnostic procedures aiming to regulate the anticipation of regret. We identified patients' reassurance, patients' requests and strategic issues as further motives for diagnostic actions.

CONCLUSION

Besides focussing on disease in the diagnostic process, emotional and strategic goals are hidden motives that play a critical role in clinical decision-making. They might even represent an initial factor in a cascade of interventions leading to overdiagnosis. How GPs might control these influences provides an important aspect for further research, practice and teaching.