Ebell Mark H, Locatelli Isabella, Senn Nicolas
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, the University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Department of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Evid Based Med. 2015 Apr;20(2):41-7. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2014-110140. Epub 2015 Mar 3.
Our objective was to determine the test and treatment thresholds for common acute primary care conditions. We presented 200 clinicians with a series of web-based clinical vignettes, describing patients with possible influenza, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), pneumonia, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and urinary tract infection (UTI). We randomly varied the probability of disease and asked whether the clinician wanted to rule out disease, order tests or rule in disease. By randomly varying the probability, we obtained clinical decisions across a broad range of disease probabilities that we used to create threshold curves. For influenza, the test (4.5% vs 32%, p<0.001) and treatment (55% vs 68%, p=0.11) thresholds were lower for US compared with Swiss physicians. US physicians had somewhat higher test (3.8% vs 0.7%, p=0.107) and treatment (76% vs 58%, p=0.005) thresholds for ACS than Swiss physicians. For both groups, the range between test and treatment thresholds was greater for ACS than for influenza (which is sensible, given the consequences of incorrect diagnosis). For pneumonia, US physicians had a trend towards higher test thresholds and lower treatment thresholds (48% vs 64%, p=0.076) than Swiss physicians. The DVT and UTI scenarios did not provide easily interpretable data, perhaps due to poor wording of the vignettes. We have developed a novel approach for determining decision thresholds. We found important differences in thresholds for US and Swiss physicians that may be a function of differences in healthcare systems. Our results can also guide development of clinical decision rules and guidelines.
我们的目标是确定常见急性初级保健病症的检查和治疗阈值。我们向200名临床医生展示了一系列基于网络的临床病例,描述了可能患有流感、急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)、肺炎、深静脉血栓形成(DVT)和尿路感染(UTI)的患者。我们随机改变疾病的概率,并询问临床医生是想要排除疾病、进行检查还是确诊疾病。通过随机改变概率,我们获得了广泛疾病概率范围内的临床决策,并用这些决策来创建阈值曲线。对于流感,与瑞士医生相比,美国医生的检查阈值(4.5%对32%,p<0.001)和治疗阈值(55%对68%,p=0.11)更低。美国医生对于ACS的检查阈值(3.8%对0.7%,p=0.107)和治疗阈值(76%对58%,p=0.005)比瑞士医生略高。对于两组医生来说,ACS的检查和治疗阈值之间的范围比流感的更大(考虑到误诊的后果,这是合理的)。对于肺炎,美国医生的检查阈值有高于瑞士医生的趋势,而治疗阈值则有低于瑞士医生的趋势(48%对64%,p=0.076)。DVT和UTI的病例没有提供易于解释的数据,可能是因为病例的措辞不佳。我们开发了一种确定决策阈值的新方法。我们发现美国和瑞士医生在阈值上存在重要差异,这可能是医疗系统差异的一种表现。我们的结果也可以指导临床决策规则和指南的制定。