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

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Lianne Jw Mulder, Sophie M Ansems, Marjolein Y Berger, Guus Cgh Blok, Gea A Holtman
{"title":"GPs' perspectives on diagnostic testing in children with persistent non-specific symptoms: a qualitative study.","authors":"Lianne Jw Mulder, Sophie M Ansems, Marjolein Y Berger, Guus Cgh Blok, Gea A Holtman","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2023.0683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Dutch GPs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11497151/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2023.0683","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

全科医生对有持续性非特异性症状儿童的诊断测试的看法。
背景:诊断检测在有持续性非特异性症状(PNS)的儿童中非常普遍,而检测不足和检测过度都会给儿童和社会带来负面影响。对患有持续性非特异性症状(PNS)的成人进行的研究表明,全科医生(GPs)出于诊断以外的原因使用诊断检测,但在儿童中尚未进行过类似的研究。目的:调查全科医生对患有 PNS 的儿童进行或不进行诊断检测的观点,以及与成人动机的差异:对荷兰全科医生进行半结构式访谈的定性研究:我们有目的地对全科医生进行抽样调查,直至数据饱和。通过两个日常实践中的真实案例,探讨了进行或不进行诊断测试的原因。在线视频访谈被逐字转录。数据收集与主题内容分析同时进行:12 名全科医生参与了研究。他们的决策涉及四个主题之间的复杂权衡:医疗(如报警症状)、社会心理(如医患关系)、咨询管理(如 "快速修复")和资源有效利用(如可持续性)。与成人相比,全科医生在对儿童进行诊断检测时更加犹豫不决,原因是儿童更容易惧怕侵入性程序、患器质性疾病的概率较低以及自主性降低:结论:与成人一样,全科医生决定对儿童进行诊断检测的原因并不局限于诊断的不确定性。旨在改变全科医生对PNS患儿检测行为的教育计划、干预措施和指南也应针对这些原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信