Physician ratings of appropriate indications for three procedures: theoretical indications vs indications used in practice.
Author(s) -
R E Park,
Arlène Fink,
Robert H. Brook,
M R Chassin,
Katherine L. Kahn,
Nancy J. Merrick,
Jacqueline Kosecoff,
David H. Solomon
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
american journal of public health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.284
H-Index - 264
eISSN - 1541-0048
pISSN - 0090-0036
DOI - 10.2105/ajph.79.4.445
Subject(s) - medicine , carotid endarterectomy , coronary angiography , appropriateness criteria , medical practice , general surgery , surgery , family medicine , radiology , carotid arteries , cardiology , myocardial infarction
We previously reported substantial disagreement among expert physician panelists about the appropriateness of performing six medical and surgical procedures for a large number of theoretical indications. A recently completed community-based medical records study of about 4,500 patients who had one of three procedures--coronary angiography, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, and carotid endarterectomy--shows that many of the theoretical indications are seldom or never used in practice. However, we find that there is also substantial disagreement (5, 25, or 32 per cent for angiography, endoscopy, or endarterectomy, respectively) about the appropriateness of indications used in actual cases if disagreement is defined by first discarding the two extreme of nine ratings, then looking for at least one rating near the bottom (1 to 3) and one near the top (7 to 9) of the 9-point scale. Patients should know that a substantial percentage of procedures are performed for indications about which expert physicians disagree.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom