An Exploration of the Drivers of Medical Overuse Among Family Physicians: A Scoping Review

Research Article

Austin J Nurs Health Care. 2024; 11(1): 1090.

An Exploration of the Drivers of Medical Overuse Among Family Physicians: A Scoping Review

Rahil Ghorbani Nia1*; Somayeh Noorihekmat2; Morteza Arab-Zozani3; Atefeh Zolfaghar Nasab4

1PhD of Health Care Management, Noncommunicable Diseases Research center, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam, Iran

2Associate Professor of Healthcare Services Management, Health Services Management Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

3Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran

4Department of Library and Medical Information, Faculty of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

*Corresponding author: Rahil Ghorbani Nia, PhD of Health Care Management, Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam, Iran. Tel: 09133958199 Email: r.ghorbani6790@gmail.com

Received: January 29, 2024 Accepted: March 09, 2024 Published: March 16, 2024

Abstract

Introduction: Health care systems, especially primary care, are becoming increasingly concerned about medical overuse. We conducted this scoping review to determine what leads to medical overuse among family physicians.

Methods: Original qualitative studies published between 1996 and July 2023 on medical overuse and primary care were included, and research that lacked sufficient relevance was excluded. Following the PRISMA-ScR checklist, a systematic search was performed on four databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, PubMed), and the results were confirmed by manual search and complemented by reference tracking.

Results: From the 9899 records found in the search, seven met the inclusion criteria and were finally included in the synthesis. Four themes were finally extracted. The findings show that the drivers affecting medical overuse among family physicians were related to physicians, patients, the health system, and technological processes. The highest effect was associated with medical overuse (physician-related drivers), patient demands (patient-related drivers), guidelines (health-system-related drivers), and technological processes (technology-related drivers).

Conclusions: This review presents a synthesis of the issue of medical overuse that should be brought to the attention of family physicians. However, as technological, systemic, and patient-related drivers are beyond the control of family physicians, it seems necessary to complement the role of the physicians with higher-level policy-making to minimize medical overuse, improve the knowledge of family physicians, and increase their participation in decision-making.

Keywords: Overuse; Medical services; Primary care; Medical overuse; Family physician; Scoping review; Qualitative

Introduction

Medical overuse is defined as the provision of non-scientific and unnecessary medical services that are not likely to improve the quality or quantity of life; in other words, these services are more likely to cause harm than good. Patients will not request these services if they are fully aware of their benefits and harms [1]. Overuse of diagnostic and therapeutic resources is observed in all specialties [2] and at all levels of health care systems [3], and it threatens patient safety and the stability of health care systems [4]. Reducing overuse in primary care is especially relevant to family doctors as they are considered the gatekeepers of the health system. However, in many countries, the specific pattern of overuse is virtually unknown [5]. The goal of family physicians and primary care is to provide high-quality health care, and part of this goal is protecting the community and individuals against overuse [6]. As part of the family physician plan, a specific population is assigned to a physician, and this physician knows their medical records and provides the assigned population with treatment. The doctor knows what the patient's previous issues were and what steps to take. If there is a need for specialized or laboratory measures, they can refer the patient to the appropriate provider, thus preventing the wastage of resources by preventing the overuse of specialized services [7]. Physicians can play an instrumental role in controlling the costs of the health care system and making sure that health care facilities are used more efficiently [8]. A primary care physician is responsible for managing the patient's health and explaining the need for preventive and curative care [9]. A family physician acts as a referral source. Thanks to the role the family physician plays and the patient's medical record, the referral system can regulate care delivery levels from primary prevention to complex and costly treatments [8]. This process is considered suitable for controlling the cost of care, strengthening the connection between general practitioners and specialists in the referral system, and rationing health services [10].

Family physician programs provide people with the services they need while reducing the chance of health service providers taking advantage of these needs [11]. Family physicians are first charged with ensuring their patients are cared for and understood and protecting them from excessive medicalization [12]. Family physicians are responsible for establishing and maintaining a scientific attitude towards quaternary prevention among the people entrusted to their care [13]. When deciding whether to provide medical treatment to a patient, doctors should have this type of prevention in mind [14].

In quaternary prevention, the emphasis is on identifying patients at risk of over-medicalization, evaluating the need for invasive medical interventions, and providing scientifically and ethically acceptable services [15]. The basic principle of medicine, nonmaleficence, forms the cornerstone of quaternary prevention [12]. One of the principles of medical philosophy and ethics is avoiding unnecessary diagnostic, therapeutic, and preventive action. Using something ineffectively or to the detriment of other measures is also considered unnecessary [14].

Having a family physician program implementation strategy could reduce the costs of repetitive services and impose unnecessary treatment costs. This could improve community health, better distribute health system resources, and increase the satisfaction of people and the medical community [16]. The primary goal of this study was to collect and summarize the results of all studies examining the drivers that motivate overuse among family physicians.

Materials and Methods

Overview

This scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR Checklist, consisting of 7 sections and 27 items. The sections were title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and funding, with sub-sections identified as PRISMA-ScR Checklist items [17]. In the data charting sub-section, it was suggested to use the Arksey and O’Malley data extraction sheet, which consists of author(s), publication year, study location, intervention type, and the comparator (if present), duration of the intervention, study populations, aims of the study, methodology, outcome measures, and important results [18]. As Arksey and O’Malley’s data extraction sheet did not meet the aim of this study a new data extraction sheet was designed.

The PRISMA-ScR statement was used for reporting the different phases of the literature search. This study was designed and conducted in 2023. We reviewed articles that focused on understanding the drivers and conducted a meta-synthesis to determine the drivers contributing to family physicians' overuse of medical services.

Search Strategy

The literature search was reported according to the PRISMA extension for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews [19]. The search terms were identified using the MeSH, and analyzed keywords in relevant and similar articles. Then, the keywords were reviewed by two experts. Two review team members (AZ, RGH) designed the search strategy, which was then examined by the third member (SN) and two experts.

The final search keywords were:

"Quaternary prevention"

"Medical overuse"

"overmedicalization"

"overtreatment"

"overdiagnosis"

"overutilization"

"medicalization"

"overmedication"

"misdiagnosis"

"polypharmacy"

"overprescription"

"Value-based care"

"General Practitioner"

"Primary Health Care"

"Family Physician"

"Family Practice"

Search strategies are reported in Appendix A.

We systematically searched Web of Science [core collection] (http://webofscience.com/), Scopus (scopus.com), PubMed/Medline, and Embase (https://www.embase.com/) from 1996 to 2023. Web of Science and Scopus are large interdisciplinary databases, and PubMed and Embase provide access to clinical sources. Two sequential searches were conducted and limited by publication date, first, from January 1, 1996, to December 30, 2022, run on January 17, 2023, and again from January 1, 2023, to January 17, 2023, in an updated search on January 17,2023. Since conducted the initial search in January and it was likely to lose studies due to database update times, a second search also included 2023. The original search strategy was used to model the updated search. One of the research members conducted the searches (AZ). One level manually forward bibliography examining the included articles and relevant reviews were done to identify additional studies (RGH, SN). It finished on Jun 19, 2023.

Study Selection

Studies that were original qualitative research investigating medical overuse and overuse of primary care by primary care physicians who provide face-to-face consultations in the primary care setting were included in this review. Studies written in English collecting participants' views, experiences, opinions, and perceptions through interviews published in peer-reviewed journals were excluded. Studies were excluded if their focus lacked sufficient relevance, they were systematic reviews or reviews, they were specific articles examining a particular drug, a specific age group such as the elderly or standard patients, male, female, child or a specialized area of medicine. The study specifically focused on overuse and medical overuse and eliminated overmedicalization, overtreatment, overdiagnosis, and overprescription to conduct a meta-synthesis.

Data Extraction

EndNote X9 and Excel 2016 were used for bibliographic control and data extraction. Duplicates were removed by (AZ) using Endnote’s “find duplicate” option and then manually. For those titles, the full texts were not accessible, we used the central library and document center of the Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Order Article Service. If they could not provide the full text, the corresponding author was contacted. Two independent research members (RGH, SN) screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion. In the case of conflicts, they discussed and consulted the 3rd author (MA) to reach a consensus.

As Arksey and O’Malley’s data extraction did not meet the aim of this study, data were charted from the included studies using a data extraction tool developed in Excel software by the members of the review team (RGH, SN). This sheet included title, author, journal, publication year, population, time period, setting, sampling, methods, country. Two review team members extracted data (RGH, SN). Uncertainties were clarified by consulting (MA).

Synthesis Methods

Following the Thomas and Hardern approach, thematic synthesis was used to synthesize qualitative data using MaxQDA18. Two reviewers did this in three stages: (i) free line-by-line coding employing an inductive analysis of findings from primary studies; (ii) organization of these 'free codes' into related areas to construct 'descriptive' themes and (iii) development of 'analytical' themes. Reviewers conducted the repeated reading of the included study results and discussed the findings with the rest of the review team to confirm them.

Content analysis and coding of the content of the selected studies were performed in MaxQDA 18 software. At this stage, the relationship between the concepts and codes was determined by extracting each study's key concepts (codes) and putting them together using the method recommended by Patterson and Canam [20]. In this method, the analysis starts from one study, and the synthesis gradually progresses to other studies, and with the addition of each study, the list of codes is completed.

Results

Study Selection

In the initial search, 9899 articles were retrieved, of which 4136 articles came from the Pubmed database, 676 articles from Web of Science, 2894 articles from Scopus, and 7031 articles from Embase. Endnote software was used to find and remove duplicates. Out of the total number of articles found in the database, 4713 duplicates were removed. Then, the titles and abstracts of the remaining articles were reviewed, and irrelevant articles were omitted. At this stage, 203 articles remained for full-text review. Of the reviewed articles, 196 were excluded due to a lack of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 7 articles were systematically reviewed (Figure 1)