[en] BackgroundPrescribing that is not concordant with guidelines is increasingly referred to as clinical inertia (CI). However, CI may be only apparent, and the absence of decision may actually reflect appropriate inaction as a result of good clinical reasoning. Our study aimed to: (i) elucidate GPs inverted question mark beliefs regarding CI and the risk of CI in their own practice, (ii) identify modifiable provider-related factors associated with CI.MethodsWe conducted 8 group interviews with 114 general practitioners (GP) in Belgium, and used an integrated approach of thematic analysis.ResultsOur results call for a redefinition of CI, in order to take into account the GPs inverted question mark extended health-promoting role, and acknowledge that inaction or delayed action follows a process of clinical reasoning that takes into account the patients inverted question mark preferences, and that is appropriate most of the time. However, the participants in our study did acknowledge that the risk of CI exists in practice. The main factor of such a risk is when GPs feel overwhelmed and disempowered, due to characteristics of either the patients or the health care system, including contradictions between guidelines and reimbursement policies.ConclusionsAlthough situations of clinical inertia exist in practice and need to be prevented or corrected, the term clinical inertia could potentially increase the already existing gap between general practice and specialised care, whereas sustained efforts toward more collaborative work and integrated care are called for.
Disciplines :
Public health, health care sciences & services
Author, co-author :
Aujoulat, Isabelle
Jacquemin, Patricia
Hermans, Michel
Rietzschel, Ernst
Scheen, André ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Diabétologie, nutrition et maladie métaboliques
Trefois, Patrick
Darras, Elisabeth
Wens, Johan
Language :
English
Title :
Clinical inertia in general practice, a matter of debate: a qualitative study with 114 general practitioners in Belgium.
Phillips LS, Branch WT, Cook CB, Doyle JP, El-Kebbi IM, Gallina DL, et al. Clinical inertia. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:825-34.
O'Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JAM, Johnson PE, Rush WA, Biltz G. Clinical inertia and outpatient medical errors. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Advances in patient safety: from research to implementation (volume 2: concepts and methodology). Rockville: MD; 2005.
Oh SW, Lee HJ, Chin HJ, Hwang JI. Adherence to clinical practice guidelines and outcomes in diabetic patients. Int J Qual Health Care. 2011;23:413-9.
Byrnes PD. Why haven't I changed that? Therapeutic inertia in general practice. Aust Fam Physician. 2011;40:24-8.
Henke RM, Zaslavsky AM, McGuire TG, Ayanian JZ, Rubenstein LV. Clinical inertia in depression treatment. Med Care. 2009;47:959-67.
Wagner EH, Sandhu N, Newton KM, McCulloch DK, Ramsey SD, Grothaus LC. Effect of improved glycemic control on health care costs and utilization. JAMA. 2001;285:182-9.
Wang TJ, Vasan RS. Epidemiology of uncontrolled hypertension in the United States. Circulation. 2005;112:1651-62.
Faria C, Wenzel M, Lee KW, Coderre K, Nichols J, Belletti DA. A narrative review of clinical inertia: focus on hypertension. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2009;3:267-76.
Giugliano D, Esposito K. Clinical inertia as a clinical safeguard. JAMA. 2011;305:1591-2.
Wens J, Vermeire E, Royen PV, Sabbe B, Denekens J. GPs' perspectives of type 2 diabetes patients' adherence to treatment: a qualitative analysis of barriers and solutions. BMC Fam Pract. 2005;6:20.
Reach G. Inertie clinique: comment est-elle possible? [Clinical inertia: How is it possible?]. Médecine des Maladies Métaboliques. 2011;5:567-73.
Aujoulat I, Jacquemin P, Darras E, Rietzchel E, Scheen AJ, Trefois P, et al. Factors associated with clinical inertia: an integrative review. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2014;5:131-47.
Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative methods for health research. London: SAGE; 2004.
Miles MB, Huberman M. Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 1994.
Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res. 2007;42:1758-72.
Morgan DL. Reconsidering the role of interaction in analyzing and reporting focus groups. Qual Health Res. 2010;20:718-22.
Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312:71-2.
Allen JD, Curtiss FR, Fairman KA. Nonadherence, clinical inertia, or therapeutic inertia? J Manag Care Pharm. 2009;15:690-5.
Berlowitz DR, Ash AS, Glickman M, Friedman RH, Pogach LM, Nelson AL, et al. Developing a quality measure for clinical inertia in diabetes care. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:1836-53.
Guthrie B, Inkster M, Fahey T. Tackling therapeutic inertia: role of treatment data in quality indicators. BMJ. 2007;335:542-4.