Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Multiple constraints compromise decision-making about implantable medical devices for individual patients: qualitative interviews with physicians

Authors: Anna R. Gagliardi, Ariel Ducey, Pascale Lehoux, Thomas Turgeon, Jeremy Kolbunik, Sue Ross, Patricia Trbovich, Anthony Easty, Chaim Bell, David R. Urbach

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Little research has examined how physicians choose medical devices for treating individual patients to reveal if interventions are needed to support decision-making and reduce device-associated morbidity and mortality. This study explored factors that influence choice of implantable device from among available options.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative approach was used. Physicians who implant orthopedic and cardiovascular devices were identified in publicly available directories and web sites. They were asked how they decided what device to use in a given patient, sources of information they consulted, and how patients were engaged in decision-making. Sampling was concurrent with data collection and analysis to achieve thematic saturation. Data were analyzed using constant comparative technique by all members of the research team.

Results

Twenty-two physicians from five Canadian provinces (10 cardiovascular, 12 orthopedic; 8, 10 and 4 early, mid and late career, respectively) were interviewed. Responses did not differ by specialty, geographic region or career stage. Five major categories of themes emerged that all influence decision-making about a range of devices, and often compromise choice of the most suitable device for a given patient, potentially leading to sub-optimal clinical outcomes: lack of evidence on device performance, patient factors, physician factors, organizational and health system factors, and device and device market factors. In the absence of evidence from research or device registries, tacit knowledge from trusted colleagues and less-trusted industry representatives informed device choice. Patients were rarely engaged in decision-making. Physician preference for particular devices was a barrier to acquiring competency in devices potentially more suitable for patients. Access to suitable devices was further limited to the number of comparable devices on the market, local inventory and purchasing contract specifications.

Conclusions

This study revealed that decision-making about devices is complex, cognitively challenging and constrained by several factors limiting access to and use of devices that could optimize patient outcomes. Further research is needed to assess the impact of these constraints on clinical outcomes, and develop interventions that optimize decision-making about device choice for treating given patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Maisel WH. Medical device regulation: an introduction for the practicing physician. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:296–302.CrossRefPubMed Maisel WH. Medical device regulation: an introduction for the practicing physician. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:296–302.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Maisel WH, Moynahan M, Zuckerman BD, Gross TP, Tovar OH, Tillman DB, et al. Pacemaker and ICD generator malfunction. JAMA. 2006;295:1901–6.CrossRefPubMed Maisel WH, Moynahan M, Zuckerman BD, Gross TP, Tovar OH, Tillman DB, et al. Pacemaker and ICD generator malfunction. JAMA. 2006;295:1901–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2012;379:1331–40.CrossRefPubMed Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2012;379:1331–40.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Dhruva SS, Bero LKA, Redford RF. Strength of study evidence examined by the FDA in premarket approval of cardiovascular devices. JAMA. 2009;302:2679–85.CrossRefPubMed Dhruva SS, Bero LKA, Redford RF. Strength of study evidence examined by the FDA in premarket approval of cardiovascular devices. JAMA. 2009;302:2679–85.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Nieuwenhuijse MJ, Nelissen RG, Schoones JW, Sedrakyan A. Appraisal of evidence base for introduction of new implants in hip and knee replacement: a systematic review of five widely used device technologies. BMJ. 2014;349:g5133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nieuwenhuijse MJ, Nelissen RG, Schoones JW, Sedrakyan A. Appraisal of evidence base for introduction of new implants in hip and knee replacement: a systematic review of five widely used device technologies. BMJ. 2014;349:g5133.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;455:3–5.PubMed Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;455:3–5.PubMed
8.
9.
go back to reference Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, Musila NR, Wensing M, Godycki-Cwirko M, et al. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8:1–11.CrossRef Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, Musila NR, Wensing M, Godycki-Cwirko M, et al. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8:1–11.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Gabbay J, le May A. Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines”? Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gabbay J, le May A. Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines”? Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ. 2004;329:1013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Auerbach CF, Silverstein LB. Qualitative data: an introduction to coding and analysis. New York: New York University Press; 2003. Auerbach CF, Silverstein LB. Qualitative data: an introduction to coding and analysis. New York: New York University Press; 2003.
14.
15.
go back to reference Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2011;322:1115–7.CrossRef Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2011;322:1115–7.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57.CrossRefPubMed Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Pope C. Contingency in everyday surgical work. Soc Health Illness. 2002;24:369–84.CrossRef Pope C. Contingency in everyday surgical work. Soc Health Illness. 2002;24:369–84.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Wadmann S, Bang LE. Rationalizing prescribing: evidence, marketing and practice-relevant knowledge. Soc Sci Med. 2015;135:109–16.CrossRefPubMed Wadmann S, Bang LE. Rationalizing prescribing: evidence, marketing and practice-relevant knowledge. Soc Sci Med. 2015;135:109–16.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Gold HT, Pitrelli K, Hayes MK, Murphy MM. Decision to adopt medical technology: case study of breast cancer radiotherapy techniques. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34:1006–15.CrossRef Gold HT, Pitrelli K, Hayes MK, Murphy MM. Decision to adopt medical technology: case study of breast cancer radiotherapy techniques. Med Decis Mak. 2014;34:1006–15.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Li LC, Grimshaw JM, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC, Graham ID. Use of communities of practice in business and health care sectors: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2009;4:27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Li LC, Grimshaw JM, Nielsen C, Judd M, Coyte PC, Graham ID. Use of communities of practice in business and health care sectors: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2009;4:27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Lexchin J. Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: what does the literature say? CMAJ. 1993;149:1401–7.PubMedPubMedCentral Lexchin J. Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: what does the literature say? CMAJ. 1993;149:1401–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Robertson C, Rose S, Keselheim AS. Effect of financial relationships on the behaviors of health care professionals. J Law Med Ethics. 2012;40(3):452–66.CrossRefPubMed Robertson C, Rose S, Keselheim AS. Effect of financial relationships on the behaviors of health care professionals. J Law Med Ethics. 2012;40(3):452–66.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference American College of Surgeons Committee on Perioperative Care. Revised statement on health care industry representatives in the operating room. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2005;90(9):27–8. American College of Surgeons Committee on Perioperative Care. Revised statement on health care industry representatives in the operating room. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2005;90(9):27–8.
25.
go back to reference Sillender M. Can patients be sure they are fully informed when representatives of surgical equipment manufacturers attend their operations? J Med Ethics. 2006;32(7):395–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sillender M. Can patients be sure they are fully informed when representatives of surgical equipment manufacturers attend their operations? J Med Ethics. 2006;32(7):395–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Park KW, Dickerson C. Can efficient supply management in the operating room save millions? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(2):242–8.CrossRefPubMed Park KW, Dickerson C. Can efficient supply management in the operating room save millions? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(2):242–8.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Burns LR, Housman MG, Booth RE, Koenig A. Implant vendors and hospitals: competing influences over product choice by orthopedic surgeons. Health Care Manage Review. 2009;34(1):2–18.CrossRef Burns LR, Housman MG, Booth RE, Koenig A. Implant vendors and hospitals: competing influences over product choice by orthopedic surgeons. Health Care Manage Review. 2009;34(1):2–18.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Multiple constraints compromise decision-making about implantable medical devices for individual patients: qualitative interviews with physicians
Authors
Anna R. Gagliardi
Ariel Ducey
Pascale Lehoux
Thomas Turgeon
Jeremy Kolbunik
Sue Ross
Patricia Trbovich
Anthony Easty
Chaim Bell
David R. Urbach
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0577-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2017 Go to the issue