Interpretation and management of genetic test results by Canadian family physicians: a multiple choice survey of performance.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Skinner SJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8241956 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Interpretation and management of genetic test results by Canadian family physicians: a multiple choice survey of performance.
Skinner Stephanie J SJ Clay Adam T AT McCarron Michelle C E MCE Liskowich Sarah S
Journal of community genetics 20210222 3
Family physicians (FPs) will encounter genetic concerns within community practice. To determine how FPs compare to genetic counselors (GCs), a cross-sectional survey was distributed to Canadian FPs and GCs in 2019. The survey assessed risk analysis, counseling, and management of genetic information. FPs performed less well than GCs on each survey question and scenario (p < 0.05). Average overall survey scores for FPs were lower than GCs (62% vs. 93%, p < 0.001). Additional genetic training for F ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMissed test results are a cause of medical error. Few studies have explored test result management in the inpatient setting.ObjectiveTo examine test result management practices of general internal medicine providers in the inpatient setting, examine satisfaction with practices, and quantify self-reported delays in result follow-up.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsGeneral internal medicine attending physicians and trainees (residents and medical students) at three Canadian teaching hospitals.Main measuresMethods used to track test results; satisfaction with these methods; personal encounters with results respondents "wish they had known about sooner."Key resultsWe received surveys from 33/51 attendings and 99/108 trainees (response rate 83%). Only 40.9% of respondents kept a record of all tests they order, and 50.0% had a system to ensure ordered tests were completed. Methods for tracking test results included typed team sign-out lists (40.7%), electronic health record (EHR) functionality (e.g., the electronic "inbox") (38.9%), and personal written or typed lists (14.8%). Almost all trainees (97.9%) and attendings (81.2%) reported encountering at least one test result they "wish they had known about sooner" in the past 2 months (p = 0.001). A higher percentage of attendings kept a record of tests pending at hospital discharge compared to trainees (75.0% vs. 35.7%, p < 0.001), used EHR functionality to track tests (71.4% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.004), and reported higher satisfaction with result management (42.4% vs. 12.1% satisfied or very satisfied, p < 0.001).ConclusionsCanadian physicians report an array of problems managing test results in the inpatient setting. In the context of prior studies from the outpatient setting, our study suggests a need to develop interventions to prevent missed results and avoid potential patient harms.
| S-EPMC6318178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic pain affects one in five Canadians, and opioids continue to be prescribed to 12.3% of the Canadian population. A survey of family physicians was conducted in 2010 as a baseline prior to the release of the Canadian Opioid Guideline. We repeated the same survey with minor modifications to reflect the updated 2017 opioid prescribing guideline. The online survey was distributed in all provinces and territories in both English and French. There were 265 responses from May 2018 to October 2019, 55% of respondents were male, 16% had advanced training in pain management, 51% had more than 20 years in practice, 54% wrote five or fewer prescriptions of opioids per month, and 58% were confident in their skills in prescribing opioids. Of the 11 knowledge questions, only two were correctly selected by more than 80% of the respondents. Twenty-nine physicians (11%) do not prescribe opioids, and the main factor affecting their decisions were concerns about long-term adverse effects and lack of evidence for effectiveness of opioids in chronic noncancer pain. Of the 12 guideline-concordant practices, only two were performed regularly by 90% or more of the respondents: explain potential harms of long-term opioid therapy and beginning dose of less than 50 mg of morphine equivalent daily. This survey represents a small proportion of family physicians in Canada and its generalizability is limited. However, we identified a number of opioid-related and guideline-specific gaps, as well as barriers and enablers to prescribing opioids and adhering to the guideline.
| S-EPMC7602479 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany primary care patients receive both medical and chiropractic care; however, interprofessional relations between physicians and chiropractors are often suboptimal which may adversely affect care of shared patients. We surveyed Canadian family physicians in 2010 to explore their attitudes towards chiropractic and re-administered the same survey a decade later to explore for changes in attitudes.MethodsA 50-item survey administered to a random sample of Canadian family physicians in 2010, and again in 2019, that inquired about demographic variables, knowledge and use of chiropractic. Imbedded in our survey was a 20-item chiropractic attitude questionnaire (CAQ); scores could range from 0 to 80 with higher scores indicating more positive attitudes toward chiropractic. We constructed a multivariable regression model to explore factors associated with CAQ scores.ResultsAmong eligible physicians, 251 of 685 in 2010 (37% response rate) and 162 of 2429 in 2019 (7% response rate) provided a completed survey. Approximately half of respondents (48%) endorsed a positive impression of chiropractic, 27% were uncertain, and 25% held negative views. Most respondents (72%) referred at least some patients for chiropractic care, mainly due to patient request or lack of response to medical care. Most physicians believed that chiropractors provide effective therapy for some musculoskeletal complaints (84%) and disagreed that chiropractic care was beneficial for non-musculoskeletal conditions (77%). The majority agreed that chiropractic care was a useful supplement to conventional care (65%) but most respondents (59%) also indicated that practice diversity among chiropractors presented a barrier to interprofessional collaboration. In our adjusted regression model, attitudes towards chiropractic showed trivial improvement from 2010 to 2019 (0.31 points on the 80-point CAQ; 95%CI 0.001 to 0.62). More negative attitudes were associated with older age (- 1.55 points for each 10-year increment from age 28; 95%CI - 2.67 to - 0.44), belief that adverse events are common with chiropractic care (- 1.41 points; 95% CI - 2.59 to - 0.23) and reported use of the research literature (- 6.04 points; 95% CI - 8.47 to - 3.61) or medical school (- 5.03 points; 95% CI - 7.89 to - 2.18) as sources of knowledge on chiropractic. More positive attitudes were associated with endorsing a relationship with a specific chiropractor (5.24 points; 95% CI 2.85 to 7.64), family and friends (4.06 points; 95% CI 1.53 to 6.60), or personal treatment experience (4.63 points; 95% CI 2.14 to 7.11) as sources of information regarding chiropractic.ConclusionsAlthough generally positive, Canadian family physicians' attitudes towards chiropractic are diverse, and most physicians felt that practice diversity among chiropractors was a barrier to interprofessional collaboration.
| S-EPMC8442384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAs useful tools for clinical decision-making, diagnostic tests require careful interpretation in order to prevent underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis or misdiagnosis. The aim of this study was to explore primary care practitioners' understanding and interpretation of the probability of disease before and after test results for six common clinical scenarios.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted with 414 family physicians who were working at primary care in Istanbul via face-to-face interviews held between November 2021 and March 2022. The participants were asked to estimate the probability of diagnosis in six clinical scenarios provided to them. Clinical scenarios were about three cancer screening cases (breast, cervical and colorectal), and three infectious disease cases (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and COVID-19). For each scenario participants estimated the probability of the diagnosis before application of a diagnostic test, after a positive test result, and after a negative test result. Their estimates were compared with the true answers derived from relevant guidelines.ResultsFor all scenarios, physicians' estimates were significantly higher than the scientific evidence range. The minimum overestimation was positive test result for COVID-19 and maximum was pre-test case for cervical cancer. In the hypothetical control question for prevalence and test accuracy, physicians estimated disease probability as 95.0% for a positive test result and 5.0% for a negative test result while the correct answers were 2.0 and 0%, respectively (p < 0.001).DiscussionComparing the scientific evidence, overestimation in all diagnostic scenarios, regardless of if the disease is an acute infection or a cancer, may indicate that the probabilistic approach is not conducted by the family physicians. To prevent inaccurate interpretation of the tests that may lead to incorrect or unnecessary treatments with adverse consequences, evidence-based decision-making capacity must be strengthened.
| S-EPMC10801057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Over-testing is a recognized problem, but clinicians usually lack information about their personal test ordering volumes. In the absence of data, clinicians rely on self-perception to inform their test ordering practices. In this study we explore clinician self-perception of diagnostic test ordering intensity. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of inpatient General Internal Medicine (GIM) attending physicians and trainees at three Canadian teaching hospitals. We collected information about: self-reported test ordering intensity, perception of colleagues test ordering intensity, and importance of clinical utility, patient comfort, and cost when ordering tests. We compared responses of clinicians who self-identified as high vs low utilizers of diagnostic tests, and attending physicians vs trainees. RESULTS:Only 15% of inpatient GIM clinicians self-identified as high utilizers of diagnostic tests, while 73% felt that GIM clinicians in aggregate ("others") order too many tests. Survey respondents identified clinical utility as important when choosing to order tests (selected by 94%), followed by patient comfort (48%) and cost (23%). Self-identified low/average utilizers of diagnostic tests were more likely to report considering cost compared to high utilizers (27% vs 5%, P = 0.04). Attending physicians were more likely to consider patient comfort (70% vs 41%, p = 0.01) and cost (42% vs 17%, p = 0.003) than trainees. CONCLUSIONS:In the absence of data, providers seem to recognize that over investigation is a problem, but few self-identify as being high test utilizers. Moreover, a significant percentage of respondents did not consider cost or patient discomfort when ordering tests. Our findings highlight challenges in reducing over-testing in the current era.
| S-EPMC6842191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundObesity is a chronic disease that affects a large proportion of the population. We examined the preparation of Canadian medical learners for obesity management through three cross-sectional studies exploring the: 1) knowledge of evidence-based obesity management among medical students; 2) perspectives of family medicine residents on the adequacy of obesity management training in their residency programs; and 3) intentions of family medicine residents regarding obesity management when they enter practice.MethodsAn online survey instrument was developed for each study. For Study 1, the survey was developed by HP, VE and JA; the questions mapped onto the ten domains outlined in the 2020 Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Obesity in Adults. For Study 2, the survey was developed by HP and TMcC; the questions aligned with competencies in the management of other chronic diseases. For Study 3, the survey was developed by MR, HP and MV; the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation (COM-B) model was used as a framework for the questions. All three surveys met the criterion for face validity and the survey for Study 3 met criteria for content and criterion validity.ResultsStudy 1 enrolled 26 first-year and 22 fourth-year students. Total correct scores were below 50 % for both groups, and patient-centeredness scores differed significantly between the groups. Study 2 enrolled 494 family medicine residents; less than 25 % thought there was sufficient time devoted to training in obesity management during residency and approximately 75 % experienced inconsistent messaging about obesity management from their preceptors. Study 3 enrolled 150 family medicine residents. Few participants believed that they had been well trained or had a clear plan for managing obesity, but most believed that obesity management will form part of their practice and that they will have the time and resources for obesity management.ConclusionCurrent medical education does not reflect the requisite knowledge for contemporary obesity management. Further, family medicine residents identified gaps in mentorship of contemporary principles of obesity management. These findings support the revision of the medical curriculum in Canada to better reflect the science of obesity and its management.
| S-EPMC11615935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There are several methods to read skin prick test results in type-I allergy testing. A commonly used method is to characterize the wheal size by its 'average diameter'. A more accurate method is to scan the area of the wheal to calculate the actual size. In both methods, skin prick test (SPT) results can be corrected for histamine-sensitivity of the skin by dividing the results of the allergic reaction by the histamine control. The objectives of this study are to compare different techniques of quantifying SPT results, to determine a cut-off value for a positive SPT for histamine equivalent prick -index (HEP) area, and to study the accuracy of predicting cashew nut reactions in double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) tests with the different SPT methods.Data of 172 children with cashew nut sensitisation were used for the analysis. All patients underwent a DBPCFC with cashew nut. Per patient, the average diameter and scanned area of the wheal size were recorded. In addition, the same data for the histamine-induced wheal were collected for each patient. The accuracy in predicting the outcome of the DBPCFC using four different SPT readings (i.e. average diameter, area, HEP-index diameter, HEP-index area) were compared in a Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) plot.Characterizing the wheal size by the average diameter method is inaccurate compared to scanning method. A wheal average diameter of 3 mm is generally considered as a positive SPT cut-off value and an equivalent HEP-index area cut-off value of 0.4 was calculated. The four SPT methods yielded a comparable area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.85, 0.83 and 0.83, respectively. The four methods showed comparable accuracy in predicting cashew nut reactions in a DBPCFC.The 'scanned area method' is theoretically more accurate in determining the wheal area than the 'average diameter method' and is recommended in academic research. A HEP-index area of 0.4 is determined as cut-off value for a positive SPT. However, in clinical practice, the 'average diameter method' is also useful, because this method provides similar accuracy in predicting cashew nut allergic reactions in the DBPCFC.Trial number NTR3572.
| S-EPMC4763448 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundHealth checks can detect risk factors and initiate prevention of cardiovascular diseases but there is no consensus on how to communicate the results. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences of the general population for communicating health check results.MethodsA randomly selected sample of the Swedish population aged 40-70 years completed a discrete choice experiment survey that included questions on sociodemographics, lifestyle and health and 15 choice questions consisting of six attributes (written results, notification method, consultation time, waiting time, lifestyle recommendation and cost). Data were analyzed with a latent class analysis (LCA). Relative importance of the attributes and predicted uptake for several scenarios were estimated.ResultsIn the analysis, 432 individuals were included (response rate 29.6%). A three-class LCA model best fit the data. Cost was the most important attribute in all classes. Preferences heterogeneity was found for the other attributes; in Class 1, receiving consultation time and the written results were important, respondents in Class 2 dominated on costs and respondents in Class 3 found consultation time, waiting time and lifestyle recommendations to be important. Health literate respondents were more likely to belong to Class 3. The predicted uptake rates ranged from 7 to 88% for different health checks with large differences across the classes.ConclusionCost was most important when deciding whether to participate in a health check. Although cost was the most important factor, it is not sufficient to offer health checks free-of-charge if other requirements regarding how the test results are communicated are not in place; participants need to be able to understand their results.
| S-EPMC8357669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrom a healthcare professional's perspective, the use of ChatGPT (Open AI), a large language model (LLM), offers huge potential as a practical and economic digital assistant. However, ChatGPT has not yet been evaluated for the interpretation of polysomnographic results in patients with suspected obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).Aims/objectivesTo evaluate the agreement of polysomnographic result interpretation between ChatGPT-4o and a board-certified sleep physician and to shed light into the role of ChatGPT-4o in the field of medical decision-making in sleep medicine.Material and methodsFor this proof-of-concept study, 40 comprehensive patient profiles were designed, which represent a broad and typical spectrum of cases, ensuring a balanced distribution of demographics and clinical characteristics. After various prompts were tested, one prompt was used for initial diagnosis of OSA and a further for patients with positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy intolerance. Each polysomnographic result was independently evaluated by ChatGPT-4o and a board-certified sleep physician. Diagnosis and therapy suggestions were analyzed for agreement.ResultsChatGPT-4o and the sleep physician showed 97% (29/30) concordance in the diagnosis of the simple cases. For the same cases the two assessment instances unveiled 100% (30/30) concordance regarding therapy suggestions. For cases with intolerance of treatment with positive airway pressure (PAP) ChatGPT-4o and the sleep physician revealed 70% (7/10) concordance in the diagnosis and 44% (22/50) concordance for therapy suggestions.Conclusion and significancePrecise prompting improves the output of ChatGPT-4o and provides sleep physician-like polysomnographic result interpretation. Although ChatGPT shows some shortcomings in offering treatment advice, our results provide evidence for AI assisted automation and economization of polysomnographic interpretation by LLMs. Further research should explore data protection issues and demonstrate reproducibility with real patient data on a larger scale.
| S-EPMC11890353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGenomic testing is increasingly performed in oncology, but concerns remain regarding the clinician's ability to interpret results. In the current study, the authors sought to determine the agreement between physicians and genomic annotators from the Precision Oncology Decision Support (PODS) team at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston regarding actionability and the clinical use of test results.MethodsOn a prospective protocol, patients underwent clinical genomic testing for hotspot mutations in 46 or 50 genes. Six months after sequencing, physicians received questionnaires for patients who demonstrated a variant in an actionable gene, investigating their perceptions regarding the actionability of alterations and clinical use of these findings. Genomic annotators independently classified these variants as actionable, potentially actionable, unknown, or not actionable.ResultsPhysicians completed 250 of 288 questionnaires (87% response rate). Physicians considered 168 of 250 patients (67%) as having an actionable alteration; of these, 165 patients (98%) were considered to have an actionable alteration by the PODS team and 3 were of unknown significance. Physicians were aware of genotype-matched therapy available for 119 patients (71%) and 48 of these 119 patients (40%) received matched therapy. Approximately 46% of patients in whom physicians regarded alterations as not actionable (36 of 79 patients) were classified as having an actionable/potentially actionable mutation by the PODS team. However, many of these were only theoretically actionable due to limited trials and/or therapies (eg, KRAS).ConclusionsPhysicians are aware of recurrent mutations in actionable genes on "hotspot" panels. As larger genomic panels are used, there may be a growing need for annotation of actionability. Decision support to increase awareness of genomically relevant trials and novel treatment options for recurrent mutations (eg, KRAS) also are needed. Cancer 2018;124:966-72. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC5821595 | biostudies-literature