Author
Listed:
- Carmen E. Guerra
(Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, carmen.guerra@uphs.upenn.edu, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)
- Phyllis A. Gimotty
(Department of Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia)
- Judy A. Shea
(Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia)
- José A. Pagán
(Department of Economics and Finance and the Institute for Population Health Policy, University of Texas–Pan American, Edinburg, Texas)
- J. Sanford Schwartz
(Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)
- Katrina Armstrong
(Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)
Abstract
Background. Little is known about the effect of guidelines that recommend shared decision making on physician practice patterns. The objective of this study was to determine the association between physicians' perceived effect of guidelines on clinical practice and self-reported prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening patterns. Methods. This was a cross-sectional study using a nationally representative sample of 3914 primary care physicians participating in the 1998 — 1999 Community Tracking Study Physician Survey. Responses to a case vignette that asked physicians what proportion of asymptomatic 60-year-old white men they would screen with a PSA were divided into 3 distinct groups: consistent PSA screeners (screen all), variable screeners (screen 1% — 99%), and consistent nonscreeners (screen none). Logistic regression was used to determine the association between PSA screening patterns and physician-reported effect of guidelines (no effect v. any magnitude effect). Results. Only 27% of physicians were variable PSA screeners; the rest were consistent screeners (60%) and consistent nonscreeners (13%). Only 8% of physicians perceived guidelines to have no effect on their practice. After adjustment for demographic and practice characteristics, variable screeners were more likely to report any magnitude effect of guidelines on their practice when compared with physicians in the other 2 groups (adjusted odds ratio = 1.73; 95% confidence interval =1:25−2:38;P=0:001 ). Conclusions. Physicians who perceive an effect of guidelines on their practice are almost twice as likely to exhibit screening PSA practice variability, whereas physicians who do not perceive an effect of guidelines on their practice are more likely to be consistent PSA screeners or consistent PSA nonscreeners.
Suggested Citation
Carmen E. Guerra & Phyllis A. Gimotty & Judy A. Shea & José A. Pagán & J. Sanford Schwartz & Katrina Armstrong, 2008.
"Effect of Guidelines on Primary Care Physician Use of PSA Screening: Results from the Community Tracking Study Physician Survey,"
Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(5), pages 681-689, September.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:5:p:681-689
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08315243
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:5:p:681-689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.