Efficiency over thoroughness in laboratory testing decision making in primary care: findings from a realist review

GPs' perspectives on diagnostic testing in children with persistent non-specific symptoms: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic testing is prevalent among children with persistent non-specific symptoms (PNS), and both undertesting and overtesting have negative consequences for child and society. Research in adults with PNS has shown that GPs use diagnostic testing for reasons other than diagnosis, but comparable research has not, to the best of our knowledge, been conducted in children. Understanding GPs' perspectives of testing decisions in children could provide insights into mechanisms of undertesting and overtesting.

AIM

To investigate GPs' perspectives of conducting or refraining from diagnostic testing in children with PNS and the differences compared with their motives when treating adults.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Dutch GPs.

METHOD

We purposively sampled GPs until data saturation. Reasons for conducting or refraining from diagnostic tests were explored using two real-life cases from daily practice. Online video interviews were transcribed verbatim. Data were collected and analysed concurrently by thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve GPs participated. Their decision making involved a complex trade-off among four themes: medical considerations (for example, alarm symptoms), psychosocial factors (for example, doctor-patient relationship), consultation management (for example, 'quick fix'), and efficient resource utilisation (for example, sustainability). Compared with when treating adults, GPs were more hesitant to conduct diagnostic testing in children because of their higher vulnerability to fearing invasive procedures, lower probability of organic disease, and reduced autonomy.

CONCLUSION

As in adults, GPs' decisions to conduct diagnostic tests in children were motivated by reasons beyond diagnostic uncertainty. Educational programmes, interventions, and guidelines that aim to change the testing behaviours of GPs in children with PNS should target these reasons.

Involving stakeholders with lived and professional experience in a realist review of community mental health crisis services: a commentary

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) is considered good practice in all health research including literature reviews. Reporting of involvement practice in realist reviews has been inconsistent leaving gaps in understanding of best practice. Realist reviews are theory driven and explain how interventions work, for whom and in which circumstances. PPI in realist reviews provides a link between programme theory and real-world experiences and can be achieved through a 'stakeholder group' bringing lived and professional experience together. This paper discusses experiences of a stakeholder group with seven members with lived experience and eight members with professional experience in a realist review focused on how community mental health crisis services work. A mental health crisis is a time of distress when people need urgent support. Many different agencies can respond to mental health crises, but despite this, people often find it hard to navigate to the right help at the right time. Reflections on involvement in four stakeholder meetings alongside practical examples of involvement activities used during the realist review are discussed. Having two researchers co-lead the stakeholder group from both lived and professional experience perspectives provided a bridge between the different expertise within the stakeholder group. Engagement with a voluntary organisation provided support to lived experience stakeholders, which sustained their involvement over time. Social connectedness was needed to establish trust between stakeholders. This required informal social contact between stakeholders that needed to be planned, especially for online meetings. To maintain the emotional wellbeing of the stakeholders during their involvement, safe spaces for discussion are needed and these are best planned in partnership with the stakeholders. We concluded that consideration of ways to provide opportunity for informal contact in online meetings may improve the experience of the stakeholders. Careful consideration of ways to sustain stakeholders' contribution over time are needed. The emotional impact of involvement should be considered when planning realist reviews. This may include built in flexibility in the involvement to include small expertise specific breakout groups, individual meetings, and should be planned in partnership with the stakeholders.

Digital Triage Tools for Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Compared With General Practitioners' Advice: Vignette-Based Qualitative Study With Interviews Among General Practitioners

BACKGROUND

Digital triage tools for sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing can potentially be used as a substitute for the triage that general practitioners (GPs) perform to lower their work pressure. The studied tool is based on medical guidelines. The same guidelines support GPs' decision-making process. However, research has shown that GPs make decisions from a holistic perspective and, therefore, do not always adhere to those guidelines. To have a high-quality digital triage tool that results in an efficient care process, it is important to learn more about GPs' decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

The first objective was to identify whether the advice of the studied digital triage tool aligned with GPs' daily medical practice. The second objective was to learn which factors influence GPs' decisions regarding referral for diagnostic testing. In addition, this study provides insights into GPs' decision-making process.

METHODS

A qualitative vignette-based study using semistructured interviews was conducted. In total, 6 vignettes representing patient cases were discussed with the participants (GPs). The participants needed to think aloud whether they would advise an STI test for the patient and why. A thematic analysis was conducted on the transcripts of the interviews. The vignette patient cases were also passed through the digital triage tool, resulting in advice to test or not for an STI. A comparison was made between the advice of the tool and that of the participants.

RESULTS

In total, 10 interviews were conducted. Participants (GPs) had a mean age of 48.30 (SD 11.88) years. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital triage tool and of all participants was the same. In those vignettes, the patients' risk factors were sufficiently clear for the participants to advise the same as the digital tool. For 3 vignettes, the advice of the digital tool differed from that of the participants. Patient-related factors that influenced the participants' decision-making process were the patient's anxiety, young age, and willingness to be tested. Participants would test at a lower threshold than the triage tool because of those factors. Sometimes, participants wanted more information than was provided in the vignette or would like to conduct a physical examination. These elements were not part of the digital triage tool.

CONCLUSIONS

The advice to conduct a diagnostic STI test differed between a digital triage tool and GPs. The digital triage tool considered only medical guidelines, whereas GPs were open to discussion reasoning from a holistic perspective. The GPs' decision-making process was influenced by patients' anxiety, willingness to be tested, and age. On the basis of these results, we believe that the digital triage tool for STI testing could support GPs and even replace consultations in the future. Further research must substantiate how this can be done safely.

Interventions to improve appropriateness of laboratory testing in the intensive care unit: a narrative review

Healthcare expenses are increasing, as is the utilization of laboratory resources. Despite this, between 20% and 40% of requested tests are deemed inappropriate. Improper use of laboratory resources leads to unwanted consequences such as hospital-acquired anemia, infections, increased costs, staff workload and patient stress and discomfort. The most unfavorable consequences result from unnecessary follow-up tests and treatments (overuse) and missed or delayed diagnoses (underuse). In this context, several interventions have been carried out to improve the appropriateness of laboratory testing. To date, there have been few published assessments of interventions specific to the intensive care unit. We reviewed the literature for interventions implemented in the ICU to improve the appropriateness of laboratory testing. We searched literature from 2008 to 2023 in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases between April and June 2023. Five intervention categories were identified: education and guidance (E&G), audit and feedback, gatekeeping, computerized physician order entry (including reshaping of ordering panels), and multifaceted interventions (MFI). We included a sixth category exploring the potential role of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML)-based assisting tools in such interventions. E&G-based interventions and MFI are the most frequently used approaches. MFI is the most effective type of intervention, and shows the strongest persistence of effect over time. AI/ML-based tools may offer valuable assistance to the improvement of appropriate laboratory testing in the near future. Patient safety outcomes are not impaired by interventions to reduce inappropriate testing. The literature focuses mainly on reducing overuse of laboratory tests, with only one intervention mentioning underuse. We highlight an overall poor quality of methodological design and reporting and argue for standardization of intervention methods. Collaboration between clinicians and laboratory staff is key to improve appropriate laboratory utilization. This article offers practical guidance for optimizing the effectiveness of an intervention protocol designed to limit inappropriate use of laboratory resources.

Diagnostic testing in children: A qualitative study of pediatricians' considerations

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Studies in adult medicine have shown that physicians base testing decisions on the patient's clinical condition but also consider other factors, including local practice or patient expectations. In pediatrics, physicians and parents jointly decide on behalf of a (young) child. This might demand more explicit and more complex deliberations, with sometimes conflicting interests. We explored pediatricians' considerations in diagnostic test ordering and the factors that influence their deliberation.

METHOD

We performed in-depth, semistructured interviews with a purposively selected heterogeneous sample of 20 Dutch pediatricians. We analyzed transcribed interviews inductively using a constant comparative approach, and clustered data across interviews to derive common themes.

RESULTS

Pediatricians perceived test-related burden in children higher compared with adults, and reported that avoiding an unjustified burden causes them to be more restrictive and deliberate in test ordering. They felt conflicted when parents desired testing or when guidelines recommended diagnostic tests pediatricians perceived as unnecessary. When parents demanded testing, they would explore parental concern, educate parents about harms and alternative explanations of symptoms, and advocate watchful waiting. Yet they reported sometimes performing tests to appease parents or to comply with guidelines, because of feared personal consequences in the case of adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

We obtained an overview of the considerations that are weighed in pediatric test decisions. The comparatively strong focus on prevention of harm motivates pediatricians to critically appraise the added value of testing and drivers of low-value testing. Pediatricians' relatively restrictive approach to testing could provide an example for other disciplines. Improved guidelines and physician and patient education could help to withstand the perceived pressure to test.

Direct-to-patient digital diagnostics in primary care: Opportunities, challenges, and conditions necessary for responsible digital diagnostics

BACKGROUND

Diagnostics are increasingly shifting to patients' home environment, facilitated by new digital technologies. Digital diagnostics (diagnostic services enabled by digital technologies) can be a tool to better respond to the challenges faced by primary care systems while aligning with patients' and healthcare professionals' needs. However, it needs to be clarified how to determine the success of these interventions.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to provide practical guidance to facilitate the adequate development and implementation of digital diagnostics.

STRATEGY

Here, we propose the quadruple aim (better patient experiences, health outcomes and professional satisfaction at lower costs) as a framework to determine the contribution of digital diagnostics in primary care. Using this framework, we critically analyse the advantages and challenges of digital diagnostics in primary care using scientific literature and relevant casuistry.

RESULTS

Two use cases address the development process and implementation in the Netherlands: a patient portal for reporting laboratory results and digital diagnostics as part of hybrid care, respectively. The third use case addresses digital diagnostics for sexually transmitted diseases from an international perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that although evidence is gathering, the often-expected value of digital diagnostics needs adequate scientific evidence. We propose striving for evidence-based 'responsible digital diagnostics' (sustainable, ethically acceptable, and socially desirable digital diagnostics). Finally, we provide a set of conditions necessary to achieve it. The analysis and actionable guidance provided can improve the chance of success of digital diagnostics interventions and overall, the positive impact of this rapidly developing field.

'Diagnostic downshift': clinical and system consequences of extrapolating secondary care testing tactics to primary care

Numerous drivers push specialist diagnostic approaches down to primary care ('diagnostic downshift'), intuitively welcomed by clinicians and patients. However, primary care's different population and processes result in under-recognised, unintended consequences. Testing performs poorer in primary care, with indication creep due to earlier, more undifferentiated presentation and reduced accuracy due to spectrum bias and the 'false-positive paradox'. In low-prevalence settings, tests without near-100% specificity have their useful yield eclipsed by greater incidental or false-positive findings. Ensuing cascades and multiplier effects can generate clinician workload, patient anxiety, further low-value tests, referrals, treatments and a potentially nocebic population 'disease' burden of unclear benefit. Increased diagnostics earlier in pathways can burden patients and stretch general practice (GP) workloads, inducing downstream service utilisation and unintended 'market failure' effects. Evidence is tenuous for reducing secondary care referrals, providing patient reassurance or meaningfully improving clinical outcomes. Subsequently, inflated investment in per capita testing, at a lower level in a healthcare system, may deliver diminishing or even negative economic returns. Test cost poorly represents 'value', neglecting under-recognised downstream consequences, which must be balanced against therapeutic yield. With lower positive predictive values, more tests are required per true diagnosis and cost-effectiveness is rarely robust. With fixed secondary care capacity, novel primary care testing is an added cost pressure, rarely reducing hospital activity. GP testing strategies require real-world evaluation, in primary care populations, of all downstream consequences. Test formularies should be scrutinised in view of the setting of care, with interventions to focus rational testing towards those with higher pretest probabilities, while improving interpretation and communication of results.

Long term trends in natriuretic peptide testing for heart failure in UK primary care: a cohort study

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) is a malignant condition with poor outcomes and is often diagnosed on emergency hospital admission. Natriuretic peptide (NP) testing in primary care is recommended in international guidelines to facilitate timely diagnosis. We aimed to report contemporary trends in NP testing and subsequent HF diagnosis rates over time.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cohort study using linked primary and secondary care data of adult (≥45 years) patients in England 2004-18 (n = 7 212 013, 48% male) to report trends in NP testing (over time, by age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status) and HF diagnosis rates. NP test rates increased from 0.25 per 1000 person-years [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.26] in 2004 to 16.88 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 16.73-17.03) in 2018, with a significant upward trend in 2010 following publication of national HF guidance. Women and different ethnic groups had similar test rates, and there was more NP testing in older and more socially deprived groups as expected. The HF detection rate was constant over the study period (around 10%) and the proportion of patients without NP testing prior to diagnosis remained high [99.6% (n = 13 484) in 2004 vs. 76.7% (n = 12 978) in 2017].

CONCLUSION

NP testing in primary care has increased over time, with no evidence of significant inequalities, but most patients with HF still do not have an NP test recorded prior to diagnosis. More NP testing in primary care may be needed to prevent hospitalization and facilitate HF diagnosis at an earlier, more treatable stage.