Clinical questions raised by clinicians at the point of care: a systematic review
- PMID: 24663331
- DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.368
Clinical questions raised by clinicians at the point of care: a systematic review
Abstract
Importance: In making decisions about patient care, clinicians raise questions and are unable to pursue or find answers to most of them. Unanswered questions may lead to suboptimal patient care decisions.
Objective: To systematically review studies that examined the questions clinicians raise in the context of patient care decision making.
Data sources: MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), and Scopus (from 1947), all through May 26, 2011. STUDY SELECTION Studies that examined questions raised and observed by clinicians (physicians, medical residents, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, nurses, dentists, and care managers) in the context of patient care were independently screened and abstracted by 2 investigators. Of 21,710 citations, 72 met the selection criteria.
Data extraction and synthesis: Question frequency was estimated by pooling data from studies with similar methods.
Main outcomes and measures: Frequency of questions raised, pursued, and answered and questions by type according to a taxonomy of clinical questions. Thematic analysis of barriers to information seeking and the effects of information seeking on decision making. RESULTS In 11 studies, 7012 questions were elicited through short interviews with clinicians after each patient visit. The mean frequency of questions raised was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.38-0.77) per patient seen, and clinicians pursued 51% (36%-66%) of questions and found answers to 78% (67%-88%) of those they pursued. Overall, 34% of questions concerned drug treatment, and 24% concerned potential causes of a symptom, physical finding, or diagnostic test finding. Clinicians' lack of time and doubt that a useful answer exists were the main barriers to information seeking.
Conclusions and relevance: Clinicians frequently raise questions about patient care in their practice. Although they are effective at finding answers to questions they pursue, roughly half of the questions are never pursued. This picture has been fairly stable over time despite the broad availability of online evidence resources that can answer these questions. Technology-based solutions should enable clinicians to track their questions and provide just-in-time access to high-quality evidence in the context of patient care decision making. Opportunities for improvement include the recent adoption of electronic health record systems and maintenance of certification requirements.
Comment in
-
Water, water, everywhere, and not a drop to drink.JAMA Intern Med. 2014 May;174(5):719-20. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1. JAMA Intern Med. 2014. PMID: 24664408 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Clinical information seeking behavior of physicians: A systematic review.Int J Med Inform. 2020 Jul;139:104144. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104144. Epub 2020 Apr 18. Int J Med Inform. 2020. PMID: 32334400
-
Finding the answers in primary care: information seeking by rural and nonrural clinicians.Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;107(Pt 2):1133-7. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004. PMID: 15360989
-
Clinicians' perceptions of usefulness of the PubMed4Hh mobile device application for clinical decision making at the point of care: a pilot study.BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 May 8;18(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12911-018-0607-9. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018. PMID: 29739392 Free PMC article.
-
Personal, technical and organisational factors affect whether physicians seek answers to clinical questions during patient care: a literature review.Health Info Libr J. 2021 Jun;38(2):81-96. doi: 10.1111/hir.12323. Epub 2020 Jul 20. Health Info Libr J. 2021. PMID: 32686897 Review.
-
Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: An Evidence Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020 Feb. Report No.: 19-05257-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020 Feb. Report No.: 19-05257-EF-1. PMID: 32129963 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Expanding access to addictions care: Implementation of a 24-hour healthcare provider support line in British Columbia, Canada.Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2024 Oct 31;19(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s13722-024-00508-z. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2024. PMID: 39482775 Free PMC article.
-
Where do UK clinicians find information at the point of care? A pragmatic, exploratory study.BMC Prim Care. 2024 Oct 23;25(1):376. doi: 10.1186/s12875-024-02627-7. BMC Prim Care. 2024. PMID: 39443868 Free PMC article.
-
Integrating Medical Librarians Into Infectious Disease Rounding Teams: Survey Results From a Pilot Implementation Study.Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024 Apr 17;11(5):ofae218. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofae218. eCollection 2024 May. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024. PMID: 38798892 Free PMC article.
-
Identifying primary care clinicians' preferences for, barriers to, and facilitators of information-seeking in clinical practice in Singapore: a qualitative study.BMC Prim Care. 2024 May 18;25(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12875-024-02429-x. BMC Prim Care. 2024. PMID: 38762445 Free PMC article.
-
A comprehensive review on the biomedical frontiers of nanowire applications.Heliyon. 2024 Apr 8;10(8):e29244. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29244. eCollection 2024 Apr 30. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 38628721 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous
