title: Physician clinical management strategies and reasoning: a cross-sectional survey using clinical vignettes of eight common medical admissions.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Physicians often select clinical management strategies not strongly supported by evidence or guidelines. Our objective was to examine the likelihood of selecting, and rationale for pursuing, clinical management strategies with more or less guideline support among physicians using clinical vignettes of eight common medical admissions.
  
  
  METHODS
  We conducted a cross-sectional survey using clinical vignettes of attending physicians and housestaff at one internal medicine program in New York City. Each clinical vignette included a brief clinical scenario and a varying number of clinical management strategies: diagnostic tests, consultations, and treatments, some of which had strong evidence or guideline support (Level 1 strategies) while others had limited evidence or guideline support (Level 3 strategies). Likelihood of selecting a given management strategy was assessed using Likert scales and multiple response options were used to indicate rationale(s) for selections.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Our sample included 79 physicians; 68 (86%) were younger than 40 years of age, 34 (43%) were female. There were 31 attending physicians (39%) and 48 housestaff (61%) and 39 (49%) had or planned to have primarily primary care internal medicine clinical responsibilities. Overall, physicians were more likely to select Level 1 strategies "always" or "most of the time" when compared with Level 3 strategies (82% vs. 43%; p < 0.001), with wide variation across the eight medical admissions. There were no differences between attending and housestaff physician likelihood of selecting Level 3 strategies (47% vs. 45%, p = 0.36). Supportive evidence and local practice patterns were the two most common rationales behind selections; supportive evidence was cited as the most common rationale for selecting Level 1 when compared with Level 3 strategies (63% versus 30%; p < 0.001), whereas ruling out other severe conditions was cited most often for Level 3 strategies.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For eight common medical admissions, physicians selected more than 80% of management strategies with strong evidence or guideline support, but also selected more than 40% of strategies for which there was limited evidence or guideline support. The promotion of evidence-based care, including the avoidance of care that is not strongly supported by evidence or guidelines, may require better evidence dissemination and educational outreach to physicians.
authors.forename: Kristofer L
authors.initials: KL
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Sarah
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Ashburn
authors.forename: Jenerius A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Aminawung
authors.forename: Micah
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Mann
authors.affiliation: Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, P,O, Box 208093, 06520 New Haven, CT, USA. joseph.ross@yale.edu.
authors.forename: Joseph S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Ross
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003657:Decision Making; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D019983:Guideline Adherence / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D006801:Humans; D007388:Internal Medicine; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009519:New York City; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians' / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2001 Sep 10;161(16):2037-42
references.pmid: 11525707
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 1995 Jan-Feb;11(1):54-8
references.pmid: 7748587
references.citation: Stroke. 2009 Jun;40(6):2276-93
references.pmid: 19423857
references.citation: Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Mar 1;44 Suppl 2:S27-72
references.pmid: 17278083
references.citation: Circulation. 2009 Apr 14;119(14):1977-2016
references.pmid: 19324967
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2002 Nov 4;177(9):502-6
references.pmid: 12405894
references.citation: JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1458-65
references.pmid: 10535437
references.citation: J Occup Med. 1990 Dec;32(12):1199-206
references.pmid: 2292739
references.citation: Eur Heart J. 2009 Nov;30(21):2631-71
references.pmid: 19713422
references.citation: J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991 Jan;39(1):22-9
references.pmid: 1987253
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Sep-Oct;28(5):1253-5
references.pmid: 19738238
references.citation: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Apr 14;53(15):e1-e90
references.pmid: 19358937
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 1994 Jun 1;120(11):956-63
references.pmid: 8172440
references.citation: Eur Heart J. 2001 Aug;22(15):1256-306
references.pmid: 11465961
references.citation: Chest. 2007 Sep;132(3 Suppl):368S-403S
references.pmid: 17873181
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2001 Aug 13-27;161(15):1889-95
references.pmid: 11493131
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 1996 May;27(5):606-9
references.pmid: 8629782
references.citation: Stroke. 2008 May;39(5):1647-52
references.pmid: 18322260
references.citation: JAMA. 2005 Aug 10;294(6):716-24
references.pmid: 16091574
references.citation: Chest. 2007 Sep;132(3 Suppl):404S-422S
references.pmid: 17873182
references.citation: Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007 Sep 15;176(6):532-55
references.pmid: 17507545
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2009 Sep 14;169(16):1525-31
references.pmid: 19752411
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Jul-Aug;28(4):w566-72
references.pmid: 19460774
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2009 Sep 14;169(16):1515-24
references.pmid: 19752410
references.citation: Circulation. 2007 Aug 14;116(7):e148-304
references.pmid: 17679616
references.citation: Ann Neurol. 2006 Sep;60(3):301-13
references.pmid: 16912978