Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, School of Community Health Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Box 453064, 4505 S. Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, NV, 89154-3064, USA.
J Community Health. 2018 Apr;43(2):328-337. doi: 10.1007/s10900-017-0426-4.
Laws across the globe require healthcare providers to disclose patient health information to public health entities for surveillance and intervention purposes. Physicians play a unique role in such mandatory reporting regimes. However, research reveals consistent under-reporting and points to limited knowledge of mandates, perceived burdens of reporting, misaligned incentives and penalties, and a lack of streamlined processes as significant reporting barriers. These barriers suggest that how legal mandates are structured may impact compliance; yet little research systematically examines their characteristics. Law-based reporting requirements differ across jurisdictions. Thus, we conducted a case study in the U.S. State of Nevada to characterize its physician mandatory reporting laws using legal mapping methodology. Nevada is a useful case study because it has few local jurisdictions and its legislature meets biennially. First, we searched key terms to find relevant state mandates and screened them using inclusion criteria. We then scanned near included provisions for additional requirements and incorporated requirements known a priori. We also searched relevant local regulations. Next, we analyzed all included provisions. Our findings indicate wide, intra-jurisdictional variation in reporting requirements across conditions. Variability extends to physician discretion, information reported, timing, recipient agencies, reporting processes, and implications of non-compliance. Local-level variation adds further complexity. Some relevant state requirements apply only to physicians and nearly one-third were absent from our searches. Our findings support exploring the hypothesis that reporting requirements' characteristics may impact compliance and call for empirically testing such relationships to enhance compliance and public health surveillance and intervention efforts.
全球各地的法律都要求医疗保健提供者向公共卫生实体披露患者健康信息,以进行监测和干预。医生在这种强制性报告制度中扮演着独特的角色。然而,研究表明,这种报告存在持续的漏报现象,并指出对报告要求的认识有限、报告的感知负担、激励措施和处罚措施不一致,以及缺乏精简的流程是报告的主要障碍。这些障碍表明,法律授权的结构方式可能会影响合规性;然而,很少有研究系统地检查其特征。基于法律的报告要求因司法管辖区而异。因此,我们在美国内华达州进行了一项案例研究,使用法律映射方法来描述其医生强制性报告法律。内华达州是一个有用的案例研究,因为它的地方司法管辖区较少,而且立法机构每两年开会一次。首先,我们搜索了关键术语,以找到相关的州授权,并使用纳入标准对其进行筛选。然后,我们扫描了接近纳入的规定,以获取其他要求,并纳入了事先已知的要求。我们还搜索了相关的地方法规。接下来,我们分析了所有纳入的规定。我们的研究结果表明,在报告要求方面,条件之间存在广泛的、司法管辖区内的差异。这种可变性延伸到医生的酌处权、报告的信息、时间、接收机构、报告流程以及不遵守规定的后果。地方层面的变化增加了进一步的复杂性。一些相关的州要求仅适用于医生,而近三分之一的要求在我们的搜索中不存在。我们的研究结果支持探索报告要求特征可能影响合规性的假设,并呼吁对这种关系进行实证检验,以提高合规性和公共卫生监测和干预工作。