A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence

被引:18
作者
Lorenz, K
Ryan, G
Morton, SC
Chan, KS
Wang, S
Shekelle, PG
机构
[1] VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare Syst, Los Angeles, CA USA
[2] RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Sch Med, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
evidence-based medicine; focus groups;
D O I
10.1093/intqhc/mzi054
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives. To examine the reasons and search strategies related to physicians' search for evidence and to compare clinician and physician manager approaches. Design. Qualitative analysis of verbatim transcripts of four focus groups in 2002. Study setting. Clinicians and managers in community practices in Southern California. Participants. Pediatricians, family practitioners, and general internists (i.e. child and adult primary care providers) in nonacademic practice and physician managers whose primary responsibility involved making management decisions within a moderate to large sized health care delivery system (e.g. health plan, community hospital, large group practice). Main outcome measures. Themes related to clinician and manager reasons for using evidence and approach to selecting among evidence sources. Results. Clinicians and managers differed substantially in their reasons for using evidence. Whereas clinicians consistently invoked clinical intuition as a guide to most routine clinical decisions, managers articulated both motivation and interest in using medical research to guide decision-making, most commonly prompted by cost. Both clinicians and managers rated trustworthiness as a paramount consideration in arbitrating between evidence sources, because neither group evinced comfort with the complexity of primary literature. Both groups expressed a preference for tested, convenient, and respected evidence sources such as expert colleagues and professional societies. Conclusions. Because clinicians invoke intuition in confronting the challenges of daily practice, evidence-based medicine interventions that target managers are likely to have larger effects on health outcomes than those that target primary care providers and individual patient treatment. Ensuring trustworthiness of evidence is of the utmost importance. Because both groups express discomfort with the format of primary evidence sources, strategies should probably not rely on individual appraisal.
引用
收藏
页码:409 / 414
页数:6
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Comparison of quality of care for patients in the Veterans Health Administration and patients in a national sample [J].
Asch, SM ;
McGlynn, EA ;
Hogan, MM ;
Hayward, RA ;
Shekelle, P ;
Rubenstein, L ;
Keesey, J ;
Adams, J ;
Kerr, EA .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2004, 141 (12) :938-945
[2]   Measuring underuse of necessary care among elderly Medicare beneficiaries using inpatient and outpatient claims [J].
Asch, SM ;
Sloss, EEM ;
Hogan, C ;
Brook, RH ;
Kravitz, RL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 284 (18) :2325-2333
[3]   Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study [J].
Ely, JW ;
Osheroff, JA ;
Ebell, MH ;
Chambliss, ML ;
Vinson, DC ;
Stevermer, JJ ;
Pifer, EA .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 324 (7339) :710-713
[4]  
Gillies RR, 2001, MED CARE, V39, pI92
[5]  
Glaser B., 1967, DISCOVERY GROUNDED T
[6]  
Grimshaw JM., 2001, MED CARE S2, V39, pIi2, DOI DOI 10.1097/00005650-200108002-00002
[7]   Hospital bed utilisation in the NHS, Kaiser Permanente, and the US Medicare programme: analysis of routine data [J].
Ham, C ;
York, N ;
Sutch, S ;
Shaw, R .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2003, 327 (7426) :1257-1260A
[8]   Implementing evidence based medicine in general practice: audit and qualitative study of antithrombotic treatment for atrial fibrillation [J].
Howitt, A ;
Armstrong, D .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7194) :1324-1327
[9]   Prescribing new drugs: qualitative study of influences on consultants and general practitioners [J].
Jones, MI ;
Greenfield, SM ;
Bradley, CP .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 323 (7309) :378-381
[10]  
Krueger R.A., 2000, Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research, V3rd