Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29909371›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Drivers and strategies for avoiding overuse. A cross-sectional study to explore the experience of Spanish primary care providers handling uncertainty and patients' requests.

José Joaquín Mira, Irene Carrillo, Carmen Silvestre, Pastora Pérez-Pérez, Cristina Nebot, Guadalupe Olivera, Javier González de Dios, Jesús María Aranaz Andrés

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Why Not? Persuading Clinicians to Reduce Overuse.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

José Joaquín MiraAlicante-Sant Joan Health District, Conselleria de Sanidad, Alicante, Spain.
Irene CarrilloHealth Psychology Department, Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche, Alicante, Spain.
Carmen SilvestreServicio de Efectividad y Seguridad Asistencial, Servicio Navarro de Salud-Osasunbidea, Pamplona, Spain.
Pastora Pérez-PérezObservatorio para la Seguridad del Paciente, Agencia de Calidad Sanitaria de Andalucía, Sevilla, Spain.
Cristina NebotCentro de Salud Fuente de San Luis, Dr. Peset Health District, Conselleria de Sanidad, Valencia, Spain.
Guadalupe OliveraHospital Clínico San Carlos, Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Madrid, Spain.
Javier González de DiosHospital General Universitario de Alicante, Conselleria de Sanidad, Alicante, Spain.
Jesús María Aranaz AndrésHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Servicio Madrileño de Salud, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIdentify the sources of overuse from the point of view of the Spanish primary care professionals, and analyse the frequency of overuse due to pressure from patients in addition to the responses when professionals face these demands.

designA cross-sectional study.

settingPrimary care in Spain.

participantsA non-randomised sample of 2201 providers (general practitioners, paediatricians and nurses) was recruited during the survey. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency, causes and responsibility for overuse, the frequency that patients demand unnecessary tests or procedures, the profile of the most demanding patients, and arguments for dissuading the patient.

resultsIn all, 936 general practitioners, 682 paediatricians and 286 nurses replied (response rate 18.6%). Patient requests (67%) and defensive medicine (40%) were the most cited causes of overuse. Five hundred and twenty-two (27%) received requests from their patients almost every day for unnecessary tests or procedures, and 132 (7%) recognised granting the requests. The lack of time in consultation, and information about new medical advances and treatments that patients could find on printed and digital media, contributed to the professional's inability to adequately counter this pressure by patients. Clinical safety (49.9%) and evidence (39.4%) were the arguments that dissuaded patients from their requests the most. Cost savings was not a convincing argument (6.8%), above all for paediatricians (4.3%). General practitioners resisted more pressure from their patients (x

conclusionSatisfying the patient and patient uncertainty about what should be done and defensive medicine practices explains some of the frequent causes of overuse. Safety arguments are useful to dissuade patients from their requests.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareCross-Sectional StudiesDefensive MedicineFemaleHumansMalePatient PreferencePractice Patterns, Physicians'SpainSurveys and QuestionnairesUncertaintyUnnecessary Proceduresprimary carequality in health care

Identifiers

PMID29909371
PMCPMC6009548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.