Perceived difficulty and appropriateness of decision making by General Practitioners: a systematic review of scenario studies

Background: Health-care quality in primary care depends largely on the appropriateness of General Practitioners’ (GPs; Primary Care or Family Physicians) decisions, which may be influenced by how difficult they perceive decisions to be. Patient scenarios (clinical or case vignettes) are widely used to investigate GPs’ decision making. This review aimed to identify the extent to which perceived decision difficulty, decision appropriateness, and their relationship have been assessed in scenario studies of GPs’ decision making; identify possible determinants of difficulty and appropriateness; and investigate the relationship between difficulty and appropriateness. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for scenario studies of GPs’ decision making. One author completed article screening. Ten percent of titles and abstracts were checked by an independent volunteer, resulting in 91% agreement. Data on decision difficulty and appropriateness were extracted by one author and descriptively synthesised. Chi-squared tests were used to explore associations between decision appropriateness, decision type and decision appropriateness assessment method. Results: Of 152 included studies, 66 assessed decision appropriateness and five assessed perceived difficulty. While no studies assessed the relationship between perceived difficulty and appropriateness, one study objectively varied the difficulty of the scenarios and assessed the relationship between a measure of objective difficulty and appropriateness. Across 38 studies where calculations were possible, 62% of the decisions were appropriate as defined by the appropriateness standard used. Chi-squared tests identified statistically significant associations between decision appropriateness, decision type and decision appropriateness assessment method. Findings suggested a negative relationship between decision difficulty and appropriateness, while interventions may have the potential to reduce perceived difficulty. Conclusions: Scenario-based research into GPs’ decisions rarely considers the relationship between perceived decision difficulty and decision appropriateness. The links between these decisional components require further investigation

Sequential Neural Processes in Abacus Mental Addition: An EEG and fMRI Case Study

Abacus experts are able to mentally calculate multi-digit numbers rapidly. Some behavioral and neuroimaging studies have suggested a visuospatial and visuomotor strategy during abacus mental calculation. However, no study up to now has attempted to dissociate temporally the visuospatial neural process from the visuomotor neural process during abacus mental calculation. In the present study, an abacus expert performed the mental addition tasks (8-digit and 4-digit addends presented in visual or auditory modes) swiftly and accurately. The 100% correct rates in this expert’s task performance were significantly higher than those of ordinary subjects performing 1-digit and 2-digit addition tasks. ERPs, EEG source localizations, and fMRI results taken together suggested visuospatial and visuomotor processes were sequentially arranged during the abacus mental addition with visual addends and could be dissociated from each other temporally. The visuospatial transformation of the numbers, in which the superior parietal lobule was most likely involved, might occur first (around 380 ms) after the onset of the stimuli. The visuomotor processing, in which the superior/middle frontal gyri were most likely involved, might occur later (around 440 ms). Meanwhile, fMRI results suggested that neural networks involved in the abacus mental addition with auditory stimuli were similar to those in the visual abacus mental addition. The most prominently activated brain areas in both conditions included the bilateral superior parietal lobules (BA 7) and bilateral middle frontal gyri (BA 6). These results suggest a supra-modal brain network in abacus mental addition, which may develop from normal mental calculation networks

Is organizational justice climate at the workplace associated with individual-level quality of care and organizational affective commitment?:A multi-level, cross-sectional study on dentistry in Sweden

Purpose The aim of this study is to investigate whether organizational justice climate at the workplace level is associated with individual staff members’ perceptions of carequality and affective commitment to the workplace.Methods The study adopts a cross-sectional multi-level design. Data were collected using an electronic survey and a response rate of 75% was obtained. Organizational justice climate and affective commitment to the workplace were measured by items from Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire and quality of care by three self-developed items. Non-managerial staff working at dental clinics with at least five respondents (n = 900 from 68 units) was included in analyses. A set of Level-2 random intercept models were built to predict individual-level organizational affective commitment and perceived quality of care from unit-level organizational justice climate, controlling for potential confoundingby group size, gender, age, and occupation.Results The results of the empty model showed substantial between-unit variation for both affective commitment (ICC-1 = 0.17) and quality of care (ICC-1 = 0.12). The overall results showed that the shared perception of organizational justice climate at the clinical unit level was significantly associated with perceived quality of care and affective commitment to the organization (p < 0.001).Conclusions Organizational justice climate at work unit level explained all variation in affective commitment among dental clinics and was associated with both the individualstaff members’ affective commitment and perceived quality of care. These findings suggest a potential for that addressing organizational justice climate may be a way to promote quality of care and enhancing affective commitment. However, longitudinal studies are needed to support causality in the examined relationships. Intervention research is also recommended to probe the effectiveness of actions increasingunit-level organizational justice climate and test their impact on quality of care and affective commitment

Consensus statement on abusive head trauma in infants and young children

Abusive head trauma (AHT) is the leading cause of fatal head injuries in children younger than 2 years. A multidisciplinary team bases this diagnosis on history, physical examination, imaging and laboratory findings. Because the etiology of the injury is multifactorial (shaking, shaking and impact, impact, etc.) the current best and inclusive term is AHT. There is no controversy concerning the medical validity of the existence of AHT, with multiple components including subdural hematoma, intracranial and spinal changes, complex retinal hemorrhages, and rib and other fractures that are inconsistent with the provided mechanism of trauma. The workup must exclude medical diseases that can mimic AHT. However, the courtroom has become a forum for speculative theories that cannot be reconciled with generally accepted medical literature. There is no reliable medical evidence that the following processes are causative in the constellation of injuries of AHT: cerebral sinovenous thrombosis, hypoxic-ischemic injury, lumbar puncture or dysphagic choking/vomiting. There is no substantiation, at a time remote from birth, that an asymptomatic birth-related subdural hemorrhage can result in rebleeding and sudden collapse. Further, a diagnosis of AHT is a medical conclusion, not a legal determination of the intent of the perpetrator or a diagnosis of murder. We hope that this consensus document reduces confusion by recommending to judges and jurors the tools necessary to distinguish genuine evidence-based opinions of the relevant medical community from legal arguments or etiological speculations that are unwarranted by the clinical findings, medical evidence and evidence-based literature

Unmet Expectations for Care and the Patient-physician Relationship

OBJECTIVE: To profile patients likely to have unmet expectations for care, examine the effects of such expectations, and investigate how physicians' responses to patients' requests affect the development of unfulfilled expectations. DESIGN: Patient and physician questionnaires were administered before and after outpatient visits. A follow-up telephone survey was administered 2 weeks post visit. SETTING: The offices of 45 family practice, internal medicine, and cardiology physicians. PATIENTS: Nine hundred nine adults reporting a health problem or concern. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Before their visits, patients rated their general health and trust in the index physician. After the visit, patients reported upon 8 types of unmet expectations and any request they made. Two weeks thereafter, patients rated their visit satisfaction, improvement, and intention to adhere to the physician's advice. They also reported any postvisit health system contacts. Overall, 11.6% of patients reported ≥1 unmet expectation. Visits in which a patient held an unmet expectation were rated by physicians as less satisfying and more effortful. At follow-up, patients who perceived an unmet expectation for care also reported less satisfaction with their visits, less improvement, and weaker intentions to adhere. Patients with an unmet expectation related to clinical resource allocation had more postvisit health system contacts. Unmet expectations were typically reported by a patient whose request for a resource was not fulfilled. CONCLUSIONS: Unmet expectations adversely affect patients and physicians alike. Physicians' nonfulfillment of patients' requests plays a significant role in patients' beliefs that their physicians did not meet their expectations for care

Patients' Perceptions of Omitted Examinations and Tests: A Qualitative Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To understand the nature of patients' expectations for parts of the physical examination and for diagnostic testing and the meaning patients ascribe to their desires. DESIGN: Qualitative inquiry based on patient interviews and focused on perceived diagnostic omissions as “critical incidents.” SETTING: Three general internal medicine practices (21 practitioners) in one mid-sized northern California city. PATIENTS: Of 687 patients visiting these practice sites and completing a detailed questionnaire, 125 reported one or more omissions of care and 90 completed an in-depth telephone interview. This study focuses on the 56 patients interviewed who did not receive desired components of the physical examination or diagnostic tests. MEASUREMENTS: Qualitative analysis of key themes underlying patients' unmet expectations for examinations and tests, as derived from verbatim transcripts of the 56 interviews. MAIN RESULTS: The 56 patients perceived a total of 113 investigative omissions falling into four broad categories: physical examination (47 omissions), conventional tests (43), high-cost tests (10), and unspecified investigations (13). Patients considered omitted investigations to have value along both pragmatic and symbolic dimensions. Diagnostic maneuvers had pragmatic value when they were seen to advance the technical aims of diagnosis, prognosis, or therapy. They had symbolic value when their underlying purpose was to enrich the patient-physician relationship. Patients in this study were often uncomfortable with clinical uncertainty, distrusted empiric therapy, endorsed early detection, and frequently interpreted failure to examine or test as failure to care. CONCLUSIONS: When patients express disappointment at failing to receive tests or examinations, they may actually be expressing concerns about the basis of their illness, the rationale for therapy, or the physician-patient relationship

Patient Preferences for Care by General Internists and Specialists in the Ambulatory Setting

OBJECTIVE: To investigate patients' preferences for care by general internists and specialists for common medical conditions. DESIGN: Telephone interview. SETTING: A convenience sample of general internal medicine practices at 10 eastern academic medical centers. PATIENT/PARTICIPANTS: A probability sample of 314 participants who had at least one visit with their primary care physician during the preceding 2 years. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Items addressed patients' attitudes concerning continuity of care, preferences for care by general internists or specialists for common medical problems, and perceptions about the competency of general internists and specialists to manage these problems. Continuity was important to participants, with 63% reporting they preferred having one doctor. Respondents were willing to wait 3 or 4 days to see their regular doctor (85%) and wanted their doctor to see them in the emergency department (77%) and monitor their care while in the hospital (94%). A majority (>60%) preferred care from their regular doctor for a variety of new conditions. Though respondents valued continuity, 84% felt it was important to be able to seek medical care from any type of physician without a referral, and 74% responded that if they needed to see a specialist, they were willing to pay out-of-pocket to do so. Although most participants (98%) thought their regular doctor was able to take care of usual medical problems, the majority thought that specialists were better able to care for allergies (79%) and better able to prescribe medications for depression (65%) and low-back pain (72%). CONCLUSIONS: Participants preferred to see their general internist despite their perceptions that specialists were more competent in caring for the conditions we examined. However, they wanted unrestricted access to specialists to supplement care provided by general internists