Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32221729›Full record

ArticleActa neurochirurgica2020

Spine neurosurgeons facing the judicialization of their profession: disenchantment and alteration of daily practice-a qualitative study.

Antoine Guillain, Anne-Hélène Moncany, Olivier Hamel, Carole Gerson, Renaud Bougeard, Grégory Dran, Bertrand Debono

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Surgeons' Perspective of Decision Making in Recurrent Diverticulitis: A Qualitative Analysis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2022
    Article
  7. The Personal and Professional Impact of Patients' Complaints on Doctors-A Qualitative Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Antoine GuillainSorbonne Study Group on Methods of Sociological Analysis of the Sorbonne (GEMASS), Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
Anne-Hélène MoncanyDepartment of Psychiatry and Addictive Behaviour, Gerard Marchant Hospital Center, Toulouse, France.
Olivier HamelDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ramsay-Clinique des Cèdres, Cornebarrieu, France.
Carole GersonCompensation and Medical Communication Department, MACSF, Paris, France.
Renaud BougeardDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinique du Val d'Ouest, Ecully, France.
Grégory DranDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinique du Millénaire, Montpellier, France.
Bertrand DebonoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ramsay-Clinique des Cèdres, Cornebarrieu, France. bdebono@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4638-1075
Clinique des Cèdres · FRClinique du Millénaire · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe judicialization of medicine can lead to professional disenchantment and defensive attitudes among surgeons. Some quantitative studies have investigated this topic in spine surgery, but none has provided direct thematic feedback from physicians. This qualitative study aimed to identify the impact of this phenomenon in the practice of spine neurosurgeons.

methodsWe proposed a qualitative study using grounded theory approach. Twenty-three purposively selected private neurosurgeons participated. Inclusion took place until data saturation was reached. Data were collected through individual interviews and analyzed thematically and independently by three researchers (an anthropologist, a psychiatrist, and a neurosurgeon).

resultsData analysis identified five superordinate themes that were based on items that recurred in interviews: (1) private practice of spinal surgery (high-risk surgery based on frequent functional symptoms, in an unfavorable medicolegal context); (2) societal transformation of the doctor-patient relationship (new societal demands, impact of the internet and social network); (3) judicialization of spine surgery (surgeons' feelings about the frequency and motivation of the complaints they receive, and their own management of them); (4) coping strategies (identification and solutions for "at risk" situations and patients); and (5) professional disenchantment (impact of these events on surgeons' daily practice and career planning). Selected quotes of interviews were reported to support these findings.

conclusionsOur study highlights several elements that can alter the quality of care in a context of societal change and the judicialization of medicine. The alteration of the doctor-patient relationship and the permanent pressure of a possible complaint encourage surgeons to adopt defensive attitudes in order to minimize the risks of litigation and increased insurance premiums. These phenomena can affect the quality of care and the privacy of physicians to the extent that they may consider changing or interrupting their careers earlier.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePhysician-Patient RelationsAdultEmotionsFemaleHumansMalpracticeNeurosurgeonsSpineBurnoutInsurance liabilityMalpractice litigationPractice patternQualitative studySpine surgery

Identifiers

PMID32221729
PMCPMC7223614
OpenAlexW3013283039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.