ArticleThe European journal of general practice2018
How do Swiss general practitioners agree with and report adhering to a top-five list of unnecessary tests and treatments? Results of a cross-sectional survey.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lansoprazole for persistent throat symptoms in secondary care: the TOPPITS RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- The impact of Choosing WiselyBMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- Presenting a Quaternary Prevention Model for the Rural Family Physician Program in Iran with an Interpretive Structural Modeling Approach.International journal of preventive medicine · 2023Article
- Low-Value Care: Convergence and Challenges Comment on "Key Factors That Promote Low-Value Care: Views From Experts From the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands".International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Organizational influences on the use of low-value care in primary health care - a qualitative interview study with physicians in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2022Article
- Strategies for de-implementation of low-value care-a scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- Identifying and prioritizing do-not-do recommendations in Dutch primary care.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Determinants of clinical practice guidelines' utilization for the management of musculoskeletal disorders: a scoping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Determinants for the use and de-implementation of low-value care in health care: a scoping review.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
- Time Trends and Factors Associated with Antibiotic Prescribing in Swiss Primary Care (2008 to 2020).Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Why clinicians overtest: development of a thematic framework.BMC health services research · 2020Review
- Why do they do it? A grounded theory study of the use of low-value care among primary health care physicians.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- Article
- Identifying and de-implementing low-value care in primary care: the GP's perspective-a cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Drug Prescription in Older Swiss Men and Women Followed in Family Medicine.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2014, the 'Smarter Medicine' campaign released a top five list of unnecessary tests and treatments in Swiss primary care, such as imaging for acute low-back pain and long-term prescribing of proton pump inhibitors.
objectivesMeasure general practitioners' (GPs) agreement with the recommendations and self-reported adherence.
methodsCross-sectional, online survey of GPs in the 'Swiss primary care active monitoring' (SPAM) network, which assessed awareness of 'Smarter Medicine' and views on each recommendation. Questions included whether the clinical situation is common, whether the recommendation is followed, whether GPs agree with the recommendation and reasons why the recommendation would not be followed.
resultsOne-hundred-and-sixty-seven of 277 GPs from the SPAM network participated (60%), of which 104 (62%) knew of 'Smarter Medicine', including 79% in German areas, 49% in French areas and 38% in Italian areas (P < 0.001). Agreement with the five recommendations was high, with scores around nine out of 10. The proportion saying they typically follow each recommendation was 68 to 74%, except not continuing long-term PPI prescriptions without attempting dose reduction, with only 34%. Common reasons for not following the recommendations were patient or other provider requests and situations that might suggest the need for more aggressive care.
conclusionTwo years after the launch of the campaign, awareness and acceptance of 'Smarter Medicine' appear to be high among Swiss GPs. By self-report, the recommendations are adhered to by most of the respondents but there may be room for improvement, especially for long-term PPI prescriptions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.