Nav: Home

Clinically inappropriate patient demands of oncologists happen infrequently

February 12, 2015

While many physicians will cite "demanding patients" as the reason for high medical costs due to unnecessary tests or treatments, a new study conducted at outpatient oncology centers found that only 1 percent of 5,050 patient-clinician encounters resulted in a clinically inappropriate request, of which very few were complied with by physicians, according to a study published online by JAMA Oncology.

Physicians often contend that malpractice lawsuits force them to practice defensive medicine and that the proliferation of information has induced patients to demand expensive tests and treatments. However, few data exist about demanding patients, the clinical appropriateness of their demands and clinicians' compliance with their requests, according to the study background.

Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and coauthors analyzed interviews with clinicians immediately after they visited with patients to assess whether a patient had made a demand, the type of request made and the clinical appropriateness of it. The interviews were conducted at outpatient oncology facilities at three Philadelphia-area hospitals between October 2013 and June 2014.

The authors evaluated 5,050 patient-clinician encounters involving 3,624 patients and 60 clinicians. Most of the patients were women and the most common cancer was hematologic (blood cancer).

Overall, 440 (8.7 percent) of the 5,050 encounters included a patient demand or request, such as for imaging studies, treatments or tests, and physicians complied with 365 (83 percent) of them. Of all 5,050 patient-clinician encounters, 316 (6.3 percent) had a clinically appropriate patient demand or request, while only 50 (1 percent) of the encounters had a clinically inappropriate request. Of the 50 clinically inappropriate demands or requests, clinicians complied with seven of them, which means that in just 0.14 percent of encounters (7 of 5,050) did clinicians order a test or treatment based on a clinically inappropriate request.

"At least in oncology, 'demanding patients' seem infrequent and may not account for a significant proportion of costs," the study concludes.

(JAMA Oncol. Published online February 12, 2015. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.197. Available pre-embargo to the media at http://media.jamanetwork.com.)

Editor's Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.

Editorial: Myth of the Demanding Patient

In a related editorial, Anthony L. Back, M.D., of the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, writes; "In this issue of JAMA Oncology, Gogineni and colleagues report on their empirical inquiry into patient demands, a nemesis that proves to be more mythical than real."

"The real point of the study by Gogineni et al, however, is this: we have to stop blaming patients for being demanding. In reality, it is hardly happening. The myth of the demanding patient is more about our own responses and how lackluster communication skills can contribute to difficult situations that stick in our throats and in our memories. And when we have calmed down enough to look up, we see that what is really happening between patients and physicians these days is something quite different," Back continues.

"It is possible that what the study by Gogineni et al documents is a point in the evolution of the patient-physician relationship when both sides recognize the complexity of cancer care belies a simple fix. Perhaps this 'negative' study is pointing to an important truth: that we need to redirect our attention from the myths that are distracting us," Back concludes.

(JAMA Oncol. Published online February 12, 2015. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2014.185. Available pre-embargo to the media at http://media.jamanetwork.com.)

Editor's Note: Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
-end-
Media Advisory: To contact corresponding author Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., call Anna Duerr at 215-349-8369 or email anna.duerr@uphs.upenn.edu. To contact editorial author Anthony L. Back, M.D., call Stephany Rochon at 206-838-3442 or email Stephany.Rochon@nyhus.com.

The JAMA Network Journals

Related Oncology Articles:

Scientific advances in thoracic oncology in 2016 highlighted by the IASLC
Capturing and summarizing the remarkable progress in lung cancer prevention, diagnosis, staging and treatment in 2016, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) announces the second annual publication of 'Scientific Advances in Thoracic Oncology,' available online now and in the August 2017 issue of the IASLC's Journal of Thoracic Oncology (JTO).
Announcing the inaugural online immuno-oncology symposium
Oncology Central is delighted to be hosting, 'Practical clinical aspects of immuno-oncology' a two-day online symposium exploring the latest developments in cancer immunotherapy, chaired by Professor Angus Dalgleish (St.
William Small, Jr., M.D., editor of new edition of classic radiation oncology textbook
William Small, Jr., M.D., chair of Loyola Medicine's radiation oncology department, is editor of a revised third edition of a classic reference in radiation oncology.
Media can register now for ESTRO 36 - Europe's largest congress on radiation oncology
Journalists can register now for ESTRO 36 - Europe's largest congress on radiation oncology, organised by the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO).
Bristol-Myers Squibb expands international immuno-oncology network (II-ON)
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company today announced that Columbia University Medical Center and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre have joined the International Immuno-Oncology Network (II-ON).
CancerLinQ partners with premier radiation oncology society
CancerLinQ LLC and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) are partnering to bring radiation oncology expertise to CancerLinQ and improve the care of cancer patients nationwide.
MD Anderson designated first Project ECHO superhub for oncology
Recognizing a critical need to address disparities in cancer care, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center has been designated as an ECHO superhub for oncology by the ECHO Institute at the University of New Mexico Health Science Center (UNMHSC).
ESMO announces new award for achievements in immuno-oncology
ESMO announces new award honoring individuals for outstanding achievements in the area of cancer immunotherapy and the launch of the ESMO Immuno-Oncology Congress.
European experts highlight the potential of xenografts in personalized oncology
European research lays the foundation for the development of new and ambitious research projects with xenografts derived from patients, preclinical models with great potential to advance research and treatment in cancer.
Special issue of Future Oncology highlights the field of Psycho-oncology
The Future Science Group (FSG) published journal, Future Oncology, has released a special issue that examines the field of psycho-oncology, which aims to bring together the biomedical and psychosocial aspects of cancer care.

Related Oncology Reading:

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Climate Crisis
There's no greater threat to humanity than climate change. What can we do to stop the worst consequences? This hour, TED speakers explore how we can save our planet and whether we can do it in time. Guests include climate activist Greta Thunberg, chemical engineer Jennifer Wilcox, research scientist Sean Davis, food innovator Bruce Friedrich, and psychologist Per Espen Stoknes.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#527 Honey I CRISPR'd the Kids
This week we're coming to you from Awesome Con in Washington, D.C. There, host Bethany Brookshire led a panel of three amazing guests to talk about the promise and perils of CRISPR, and what happens now that CRISPR babies have (maybe?) been born. Featuring science writer Tina Saey, molecular biologist Anne Simon, and bioethicist Alan Regenberg. A Nobel Prize winner argues banning CRISPR babies won’t work Geneticists push for a 5-year global ban on gene-edited babies A CRISPR spin-off causes unintended typos in DNA News of the first gene-edited babies ignited a firestorm The researcher who created CRISPR twins defends...