2020
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6876
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Internal Medicine Residents and the Practice of Defensive Medicine: A Pilot Study Across Three Internal Medicine Residency Programs

Abstract: Background Defensive medicine is becoming increasingly prevalent in the United States and is estimated to cost billions of dollars in excess healthcare spending. There is evidence that the practice of defensive medicine starts early in the medical career. Defensive medicine has been investigated among residents in high medico-legal risk specialties, but there is a paucity of information on its prevalence among internal medicine residents. Objective To examine the prevalence and patterns of defensive medical pr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table 1 showed the characteristics of the 27 studies involved in the review [ 2 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 23 , 27 42 ]. The included studies were published between 2002 and 2020 and distributed as follows: six in the USA [ 14 , 19 , 29 , 32 , 37 , 42 ], four in Italy [ 12 , 30 , 34 , 35 ], three in Israel [ 22 , 23 , 28 ], two studies per country, China [ 15 , 33 ],Turkey [ 2 , 21 ], Netherlands [ 38 , 41 ], UK [ 27 , 31 ],one study per country, Iran [ 17 ], Sudan [ 20 ], Japan [ 18 ]. Three studies were conducted as an international, the first in Canada, South Africa, and the USA [ 36 ], the second in nine countries in the Middle East [ 40 ], the third in 74 countries [ 39 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Table 1 showed the characteristics of the 27 studies involved in the review [ 2 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 23 , 27 42 ]. The included studies were published between 2002 and 2020 and distributed as follows: six in the USA [ 14 , 19 , 29 , 32 , 37 , 42 ], four in Italy [ 12 , 30 , 34 , 35 ], three in Israel [ 22 , 23 , 28 ], two studies per country, China [ 15 , 33 ],Turkey [ 2 , 21 ], Netherlands [ 38 , 41 ], UK [ 27 , 31 ],one study per country, Iran [ 17 ], Sudan [ 20 ], Japan [ 18 ]. Three studies were conducted as an international, the first in Canada, South Africa, and the USA [ 36 ], the second in nine countries in the Middle East [ 40 ], the third in 74 countries [ 39 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seven studies involved more than 1000 physicians [ 12 , 15 , 29 , 32 , 35 37 ]. The studies conducted among different disciplines and distributed as follows: five among neurosurgeons [ 21 , 29 , 36 38 ], three among psychiatrists [ 22 , 27 , 40 ], two studies for each specialty, Gastroenterologists [ 18 , 30 ], Obstetrics/Gynecology [ 15 , 20 ], nine studies among General practitioners or more than one specialty [ 2 , 12 , 14 , 17 , 28 , 31 , 33 , 35 , 41 ], and one study for each specialty, Orthopedic [ 32 ], Radiation oncology [ 34 ], Breast pathologists [ 19 ], Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery [ 23 ], Infectious diseases and Clinical microbiology doctors [ 39 ], Internal Medicine [ 42 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it may be hypothesised that drivers are similar to those identified in the literature among other health professionals. Influences identified in the literature include risk of litigation, peer pressure, education by senior colleagues, practice norms, pressure by patients and pressure from regulatory bodies [3,5,[10][11][12]. It is possible that the drivers of defensive practice are context-and setting-specific in pharmacy, particularly as it is a profession which encompasses several different areas of practice.…”
Section: Defensive Pharmacy Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
“…avoiding a particular field of work or avoiding certain patients identified as high-risk. Defensive practice has a number of negative consequences; it can lead to increased healthcare spending, reduced quality of care to patients and reduced job satisfaction among practitioners [ 2 , 3 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%