scholarly journals The impact of tort reform on defensive medicine, quality of care, and physician supply: A systematic review

Author(s):  
Rajender Agarwal ◽  
Ashutosh Gupta ◽  
Shweta Gupta
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T. Nguyen ◽  
Amir Alishahi Tabriz ◽  
Jinhai Huo ◽  
Karim Hanna ◽  
Christopher M. Shea ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND E-visits involve asynchronous communication between providers and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of the evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and healthcare delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE To address this gap, this systematic review examines how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and healthcare quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits’ impact on clinical and healthcare delivery outcomes. RESULTS Out of 1,858 papers, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (e.g., diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions but variable quality was observed in infection management (e.g., appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on healthcare utilization varied across conditions (e.g., lower utilization for dermatology) but mixed impact in primary care. Healthcare costs were lower for e-visits for a wide-range of conditions (e.g., dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on healthcare access. Available studies are observational in nature and it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide comparable clinical outcomes to in-person care and reduce healthcare costs for certain healthcare conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on healthcare quality, especially regarding infection management (e.g., sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (e.g., clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions are amenable to e-visits and which conditions require in-person or face-to-face care (e.g., virtual visit). CLINICALTRIAL not applicable


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 1591-1606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Diamond ◽  
Karen Izquierdo ◽  
Dana Canfield ◽  
Konstantina Matsoukas ◽  
Francesca Gany

CJEM ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (04) ◽  
pp. 286-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alix J.E. Carter ◽  
Alecs H. Chochinov

ABSTRACT Introduction: US emergency personnel cared for 106% more patients in 1990 than they did in 1980, and national emergency department census data show that 60%–80% of those patients presented with non-urgent or minor medical problems. The hiring of nurse practitioners (NPs) is one proposed solution to the ongoing overcrowding and physician shortage facing emergency departments (EDs). Methods: We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE and Cinahl to find articles that discussed NPs in the ED setting, looking specifically at 4 key outcome measures: wait times, patient satisfaction, quality of care and cost effectiveness. Results: Although some questions remain, a review of the literature suggests that NPs can reduce wait times for the ED, lead to high patient satisfaction and provide a quality of care equal to that of a mid-grade resident. Cost, when compared with resident physicians, is higher; however, data comparing to the hiring additional medical professionals is lacking. Conclusion: The medical community should further explore the use of NPs, particularly in fast track areas for high volume departments. In rural areas, NPs could supplement overextended physicians and allow health centres to remain open when they might otherwise have to close. These strategies could improve access to care and patient satisfaction for selected urban and rural populations as well as make the best use of limited medical resources.


2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irena Makivić ◽  
† Janko Kersnik ◽  
Zalika Klemenc-Ketiš

Abstract The aim of our systematic review was to analyse the published literature on the psychosocial dimension of care in family medicine and its relationship with quality of care. We wanted to find out whether there is any evidence on the psychosocial approach in (family) medicine. The recommended bio-psycho-social approach, besides the biomedical model of illness, takes into account several co-influencing psychological, sociological and existential factors. An online search of nine different databases used Boolean operators and the following selection criteria: the paper contained information on the holistic approach, quality indicators, family medicine, patient-centred care and/or the bio-psycho-social model of treatment. We retrieved 743 papers, of which 36 fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Including the psychosocial dimension in patient management has been found to be useful in the prevention and treatment of physical and psychiatric illness, resulting in improved social functioning and patient satisfaction, reduced health care disparities, and reduced annual medical care charges. The themes of patient-centred, behavioural or psychosocial medicine were quite well presented in several papers. We could not find any conclusive evidence of the impact of a holistic biopsycho-social-approach. Weak and variable definitions of psychosocial dimensions, a low number of welldesigned intervention studies, and low numbers of included patients limited our conclusions.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Walker ◽  
Bridget Honan ◽  
Daniel Haustead ◽  
David Mountain ◽  
Vinay Gangathimmaiah ◽  
...  

abstractBackgroundTime-based-targets for emergency department length-of-stay were introduced in England in 2000; followed by Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia after emergency department crowding was associated with poor quality of care and increased mortality.ObjectivesThe aim of the systematic review was to evaluate qualitative literature to investigate how implementing time-based-targets for emergency department length-of-stay has influenced the quality of care of patients.MethodsSystematic review of qualitative studies that described knowledge, attitudes to or experiences regarding a time-based-target for emergency department length-of-stay. Searches were conducted in Cochrane library, Medline, Embase, CInAHL, Emerald, ABI/Inform, and Informit. Individual studies were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Individual study findings underwent thematic analysis. Confidence in findings was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.ResultsThe review included thirteen studies from four countries, incorporating 617 interviews. Themes identified were: quality of care, access block and overcrowding, patient experience, staff morale and workload, intrahospital and interdepartmental relationships, clinical education and training, gaming, and enablers and barriers to achieving targets. The confidence in findings is moderate or high for most themes. More patient and junior doctor perspectives are needed.ConclusionsEmergency time-based-targets have impacted on the quality of emergency patient care. The impact can be both positive and negative and successful implementation depends on whole hospital resourcing and engagement with targets.FundingThe Australasian College for Emergency Medicine provided administrative support for the study, no funding was received.RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42019107755 (prospective)


BJGP Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. BJGPO.2021.0040
Author(s):  
Ruth Parker ◽  
Emma Figures ◽  
Charlotte Paddison ◽  
James Matheson ◽  
David Blane ◽  
...  

BackgroundCOVID-19 has led to rapid and widespread use of remote consultations in general practice, but the health inequalities impact remains unknown.AimTo explore the impact of remote consultations in general practice compared to face-to-face consultations on utilisation and clinical outcomes across socio-economic and disadvantaged groups.Design & settingSystematic reviewMethodWe undertook an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to June 2020. We included studies which compared remote consultations to face-to-face consultations in primary care and reported outcomes by PROGRESS Plus criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Data was synthesised narratively.ResultsBased on 13 studies, exploring telephone and internet-based consultations, we found that telephone consultations were used by younger working age people, the very old and non-immigrants, with internet-based consultations more likely to be used by younger people. Women consistently used more remote forms of consulting than men. Socio-economic and ethnicity findings were mixed, with weak evidence that patients from more affluent areas were more likely to use internet-based communication. Remote consultations appeared to help patients with opioid dependence remain engaged with primary care. No studies reported on the impact on quality of care or clinical outcomes.ConclusionRemote consultations in general practice are likely to be used more by younger working people, non-immigrants, the elderly and women, with internet-based consultations more by younger, affluent and educated groups. Wide-spread use of remote consultations should be treated with caution until the inequalities impact on clinical outcomes and quality of care is known.


2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (682) ◽  
pp. e294-e303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Poompong Sripa ◽  
Benedict Hayhoe ◽  
Priya Garg ◽  
Azeem Majeed ◽  
Geva Greenfield

BackgroundGPs often act as gatekeepers, authorising patients’ access to specialty care. Gatekeeping is frequently perceived as lowering health service use and health expenditure. However, there is little evidence suggesting that gatekeeping is more beneficial than direct access in terms of patient- and health-related outcomes.AimTo establish the impact of GP gatekeeping on quality of care, health use and expenditure, and health outcomes and patient satisfaction.Design and settingA systematic review.MethodThe databases MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant articles using a search strategy. Two authors independently screened search results and assessed the quality of studies.ResultsElectronic searches identified 4899 studies (after removing duplicates), of which 25 met the inclusion criteria. Gatekeeping was associated with better quality of care and appropriate referral for further hospital visits and investigation. However, one study reported unfavourable outcomes for patients with cancer under gatekeeping, and some concerns were raised about the accuracy of diagnoses made by gatekeepers. Gatekeeping resulted in fewer hospitalisations and use of specialist care, but inevitably was associated with more primary care visits. Patients were less satisfied with gatekeeping than direct-access systems.ConclusionGatekeeping was associated with lower healthcare use and expenditure, and better quality of care, but with lower patient satisfaction. Survival rate of patients with cancer in gatekeeping schemes was significantly lower than those in direct access, although primary care gatekeeping was not otherwise associated with delayed patient referral. The long-term outcomes of gatekeeping arrangements should be carefully studied before devising new gatekeeping policies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document