CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareRadiology practices and education

Patient Notification and Follow-up of Abnormal Test Results: A Physician Survey

Boohaker, Emily A.·1996·Archives of Internal Medicine
DOI 10.1001/archinte.1996.00440030133016
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate physician practices in the handling of patients' test results from the time the test was ordered until the time any required follow-up was completed. METHODS: Survey of 161 attending physicians and 101 residents in family practice and internal medicine practicing at a large urban teaching hospital and 21 suburban primary care practices in Southeastern Michigan. The survey included questions about physician demographics, and whether physicians have methods for ensuring that (1) the results of all tests ordered are received, (2) all patients are notified of results, (3) all patient notification is documented, and (4) all required follow-up is done. Physicians were also asked to self-rate the reliability of their methods and the importance of various steps in the handling of patients' test results. RESULTS: The response rate was 79% for both attending physicians and residents. Approximately 17% to 32% of physicians reported having no reliable method to make sure that the results of all tests ordered are received. One third of physicians do not always notify patients of abnormal results. The most common reasons reported for not notifying patients were that the results were trivial and that the patient was expected to return to the clinic soon. Residents were significantly less likely to document notifying patients of abnormal results (P < .001). Only 23% of physicians reported having a reliable method for identifying patients overdue for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of methods to ensure that the results of tests ordered were received, dependence on follow-up visits to inform patients of results, and lack of documentation were relatively common among physicians surveyed. These could lead to an increased risk of malpractice litigation and suboptimal patient care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinte.1996.00440030133016

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Emerging data suggest a high prevalence of communication breakdowns among physicians, patients, and important members of the health care team who assist with the diagnostic process.

    “Communication breakdowns are an increasingly recognized preventable factor in medical mishaps, and emerging data suggest a high prevalence of communication breakdowns among physicians, patients, and important members of the health care team who assist with the diagnostic process.21,25–32”

    From Reducing Diagnostic Errors through Effective Communication: Harnessing the Power of Information Technology (2008) · cites this paper as [26]

  • Communication breakdowns are an increasingly recognized preventable factor in medical mishaps.

    “Communication breakdowns are an increasingly recognized preventable factor in medical mishaps, and emerging data suggest a high prevalence of communication breakdowns among physicians, patients, and important members of the health care team who assist with the diagnostic process.21,25–32”

    From Reducing Diagnostic Errors through Effective Communication: Harnessing the Power of Information Technology (2008) · cites this paper as [26]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Boohaker, E. A.
Affiliations
Henry Ford Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Boohaker, Emily A.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1996-02-12
Volume
156
Issue
3
Pages
327
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archinte.1996.00440030133016
OpenAlex
W2078418273
Cited by
111
References
22
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HS07516-01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
Keywords
laboratory abnormalities, patient notification, follow-up care, physician practice, general practice, internal medicine, medical residents, malpractice risk
MeSH terms
Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Family Practice, Female, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Internal Medicine, Male, Michigan, Surveys and Questionnaires, Truth Disclosure, Urban Population

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review