General practitioners' perceptions of medicolegal risk. Using case scenarios to assess the potential impact of prostate cancer screening guidelines.
OBJECTIVE
To ascertain general practitioners' perceptions of medicolegal risk when screening for prostate cancer, and explore the potential impact of three national guidelines on perceptions and clinical practice.


METHODS
Postal survey in August 1997.


METHODS
219 randomly selected GPs in New South Wales (65% response rate).


METHODS
Response to case scenarios; perceptions of medicolegal risk and protection afforded by national guidelines before and after reading extracts of three national guidelines; ratings of current and potential strategies to increase GPs' sense of medicolegal protection.


RESULTS
90% (95% CI, 86.5%-94.3%) would screen an asymptomatic male patient and 61% (95% CI, 54.2%-67.2%) indicated GPs would be at risk if they did not screen. Although significant changes in responses were found after respondents had read guideline extracts, 46% (95% CI, 39.5%-52.7%) continued to perceive medicolegal risk if screening was not performed. About two-thirds (65%; 95% CI, 59.9%-72.5%) supported a clear statement about the legal status of guidelines in a court of law to increase their sense of medicolegal protection.


CONCLUSIONS
Even when made aware of national evidence-based guidelines against prostate cancer screening, GPs in our survey perceived limited hypothetical medicolegal protection.
Girgis
S
S
Needs Assessment and Health Outcomes Unit, Central Sydney Area Health Service, Newtown, NSW.
Ward
J E
JE
Thomson
C J
CJ
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001315:Australia; D005194:Family Practice; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D008875:Middle Aged; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*