A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence

Karl A. Lorenz, Gery W. Ryan, Sally C. Morton, Kitty S. Chan, Steven Wang, Paul G. Shekelle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives. To examine the reasons and search strategies related to physicians' search for evidence and to compare clinician and physician manager approaches. Design. Qualitative analysis of verbatim transcripts of four focus groups in 2002. Study setting. Clinicians and managers in community practices in Southern California. Participants. Pediatricians, family practitioners, and general internists (i.e. child and adult primary care providers) in non-academic practice and physician managers whose primary responsibility involved making management decisions within a moderate to large sized health care delivery system (e.g. health plan, community hospital, large group practice). Main outcome measures. Themes related to clinician and manager reasons for using evidence and approach to selecting among evidence sources. Results. Clinicians and managers differed substantially in their reasons for using evidence. Whereas clinicians consistently invoked clinical intuition as a guide to most routine clinical decisions, managers articulated both motivation and interest in using medical research to guide decision-making, most commonly prompted by cost. Both clinicians and managers rated trustworthiness as a paramount consideration in arbitrating between evidence sources, because neither group evinced comfort with the complexity of primary literature. Both groups expressed a preference for tested, convenient, and respected evidence sources such as expert colleagues and professional societies. Conclusions. Because clinicians invoke intuition in confronting the challenges of daily practice, evidence-based medicine interventions that target managers are likely to have larger effects on health outcomes than those that target primary care providers and individual patient treatment. Ensuring trustworthiness of evidence is of the utmost importance. Because both groups express discomfort with the format of primary evidence sources, strategies should probably not rely on individual appraisal.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)409-414
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care
Volume17
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Primary Care Physicians
Intuition
physician
manager
Physicians
examination
Primary Health Care
Decision Making
Research
Delivery of Health Care
evidence
Group Practice
Evidence-Based Medicine
Community Hospital
Negotiating
Health
Focus Groups
General Practitioners
Biomedical Research
Motivation

Keywords

  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Focus groups

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence. / Lorenz, Karl A.; Ryan, Gery W.; Morton, Sally C.; Chan, Kitty S.; Wang, Steven; Shekelle, Paul G.

In: International Journal for Quality in Health Care, Vol. 17, No. 5, 10.2005, p. 409-414.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lorenz, Karl A. ; Ryan, Gery W. ; Morton, Sally C. ; Chan, Kitty S. ; Wang, Steven ; Shekelle, Paul G. / A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence. In: International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2005 ; Vol. 17, No. 5. pp. 409-414.
@article{c45da24445734d20877d330d8a4f0a37,
title = "A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence",
abstract = "Objectives. To examine the reasons and search strategies related to physicians' search for evidence and to compare clinician and physician manager approaches. Design. Qualitative analysis of verbatim transcripts of four focus groups in 2002. Study setting. Clinicians and managers in community practices in Southern California. Participants. Pediatricians, family practitioners, and general internists (i.e. child and adult primary care providers) in non-academic practice and physician managers whose primary responsibility involved making management decisions within a moderate to large sized health care delivery system (e.g. health plan, community hospital, large group practice). Main outcome measures. Themes related to clinician and manager reasons for using evidence and approach to selecting among evidence sources. Results. Clinicians and managers differed substantially in their reasons for using evidence. Whereas clinicians consistently invoked clinical intuition as a guide to most routine clinical decisions, managers articulated both motivation and interest in using medical research to guide decision-making, most commonly prompted by cost. Both clinicians and managers rated trustworthiness as a paramount consideration in arbitrating between evidence sources, because neither group evinced comfort with the complexity of primary literature. Both groups expressed a preference for tested, convenient, and respected evidence sources such as expert colleagues and professional societies. Conclusions. Because clinicians invoke intuition in confronting the challenges of daily practice, evidence-based medicine interventions that target managers are likely to have larger effects on health outcomes than those that target primary care providers and individual patient treatment. Ensuring trustworthiness of evidence is of the utmost importance. Because both groups express discomfort with the format of primary evidence sources, strategies should probably not rely on individual appraisal.",
keywords = "Evidence-based medicine, Focus groups",
author = "Lorenz, {Karl A.} and Ryan, {Gery W.} and Morton, {Sally C.} and Chan, {Kitty S.} and Steven Wang and Shekelle, {Paul G.}",
year = "2005",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1093/intqhc/mzi054",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "409--414",
journal = "International Journal for Quality in Health Care",
issn = "1353-4505",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A qualitative examination of primary care providers' and physician managers' uses and views of research evidence

AU - Lorenz, Karl A.

AU - Ryan, Gery W.

AU - Morton, Sally C.

AU - Chan, Kitty S.

AU - Wang, Steven

AU - Shekelle, Paul G.

PY - 2005/10

Y1 - 2005/10

N2 - Objectives. To examine the reasons and search strategies related to physicians' search for evidence and to compare clinician and physician manager approaches. Design. Qualitative analysis of verbatim transcripts of four focus groups in 2002. Study setting. Clinicians and managers in community practices in Southern California. Participants. Pediatricians, family practitioners, and general internists (i.e. child and adult primary care providers) in non-academic practice and physician managers whose primary responsibility involved making management decisions within a moderate to large sized health care delivery system (e.g. health plan, community hospital, large group practice). Main outcome measures. Themes related to clinician and manager reasons for using evidence and approach to selecting among evidence sources. Results. Clinicians and managers differed substantially in their reasons for using evidence. Whereas clinicians consistently invoked clinical intuition as a guide to most routine clinical decisions, managers articulated both motivation and interest in using medical research to guide decision-making, most commonly prompted by cost. Both clinicians and managers rated trustworthiness as a paramount consideration in arbitrating between evidence sources, because neither group evinced comfort with the complexity of primary literature. Both groups expressed a preference for tested, convenient, and respected evidence sources such as expert colleagues and professional societies. Conclusions. Because clinicians invoke intuition in confronting the challenges of daily practice, evidence-based medicine interventions that target managers are likely to have larger effects on health outcomes than those that target primary care providers and individual patient treatment. Ensuring trustworthiness of evidence is of the utmost importance. Because both groups express discomfort with the format of primary evidence sources, strategies should probably not rely on individual appraisal.

AB - Objectives. To examine the reasons and search strategies related to physicians' search for evidence and to compare clinician and physician manager approaches. Design. Qualitative analysis of verbatim transcripts of four focus groups in 2002. Study setting. Clinicians and managers in community practices in Southern California. Participants. Pediatricians, family practitioners, and general internists (i.e. child and adult primary care providers) in non-academic practice and physician managers whose primary responsibility involved making management decisions within a moderate to large sized health care delivery system (e.g. health plan, community hospital, large group practice). Main outcome measures. Themes related to clinician and manager reasons for using evidence and approach to selecting among evidence sources. Results. Clinicians and managers differed substantially in their reasons for using evidence. Whereas clinicians consistently invoked clinical intuition as a guide to most routine clinical decisions, managers articulated both motivation and interest in using medical research to guide decision-making, most commonly prompted by cost. Both clinicians and managers rated trustworthiness as a paramount consideration in arbitrating between evidence sources, because neither group evinced comfort with the complexity of primary literature. Both groups expressed a preference for tested, convenient, and respected evidence sources such as expert colleagues and professional societies. Conclusions. Because clinicians invoke intuition in confronting the challenges of daily practice, evidence-based medicine interventions that target managers are likely to have larger effects on health outcomes than those that target primary care providers and individual patient treatment. Ensuring trustworthiness of evidence is of the utmost importance. Because both groups express discomfort with the format of primary evidence sources, strategies should probably not rely on individual appraisal.

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Focus groups

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28944453788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28944453788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/intqhc/mzi054

DO - 10.1093/intqhc/mzi054

M3 - Article

C2 - 15923281

AN - SCOPUS:28944453788

VL - 17

SP - 409

EP - 414

JO - International Journal for Quality in Health Care

JF - International Journal for Quality in Health Care

SN - 1353-4505

IS - 5

ER -