Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-16T16:13:27.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Physicians' Perceptions of Consensus Reports

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Martha N. Hill
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing
Carol S. Weisman
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

Abstract

In a pretest-posttest panel survey of 595 eligible Maryland physicians practicing family or general medicine, internal medicine, cardiology, or nephrology, perceptions of consensus reports designed to alter medical practice are examined. On a 7-point scale, physicians reported positive or neutral views of descriptors, most favorably rating credible (mean = 2.25) and reliable (mean = 2.41), and least favorably rating biased (mean = 3.79). In a regression analysis of factors influencing changes in practice behavior congruent with consensus recommendations before and 1 year after the release of a consensus report on hypertension (8), these perceptions were not significant determinants. The strongest predictor of congruent practice behavior a year after the report was published was congruent practice behavior just prior to the report's release, and the second strongest predictor was perceived influence of the report's sources/sponsors.

Type
General Essays
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Brooks, S. L.Survey of compliance with American Heart Association guidelines for prevention of bacterial endocarditis. Journal American Dental Association, 1980, 101, 4143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Cloher, T. P., & Whelton, P. K.Physician approach to the recognition and initial management of hypertension: Results of a statewide survey of Maryland physicians. Archives of Internal Medicine. 1986, 146, 529–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Cohen, D. I., Littenberg, B., Wentzel, C. et al. , Improving physician compliance with preventive medicine guidelines. Medical Care, 1982, 20, 1040–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Coleman, J., Menzel, H., & Katz, E.Social processes in physicians' adoption of a new drug. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 1959, 9, 119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Cutler, J., Mattson, M., Goor, R. et al. , Beliefs and practices by primary care physicians and the public regarding hypertension (abstract). Circulation, 1984, 7011, 281.Google Scholar
6.Donabedian, A.Criteria, norms, and standards of quality: What do they mean? American Journal of Public Health, 1981, 71, 409–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Gleicher, N.Cesarean section rates in the United States: The short-term failure of the National Consensus Conference in 1980. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1984, 252, 3273–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Hill, M. N., Levine, D. M., & Whelton, P. K.Awareness, use, and impact of the 1984 Joint National Committee consensus report on high blood pressure. American Journal of Public Health, 1988, 78, 1190–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Jacoby, I., & Clark, S. M.Direct mailing as a means of disseminating NIH consensus statements. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1986, 255, 1328–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Jacoby, I., & Rose, M.Transfer of information and its impact on medical practice: The U.S. experience. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1986, 2, 107–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Jordan, H. S., Burke, J. R, Fineberg, H. et al. , Diffusion of innovations in burn care: Selected findings. Burns Including Thermal Injury, 1983, 9, 271–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Kessner, D. M.Diffusion of new medical information. American Journal of Public Health, 1981, 71, 367–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Kanouse, D. E., & Jacoby, I.When does information change practitioners’ behavior? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1988, 4, 2733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Kanouse, D. E.Winkler, J. D., Kosecoff, J., et al. Changing medical practice through technology assessment: An evaluation of the NIH Consensus Development Process. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press, 1989.Google Scholar
15.Liberati, A., Patterson, B. W., Biener, L., & McNeil, B. J.The impact of early breast cancer randomized trials on the practice of medicine (abstract). Controlled Clinical Trials, 1985, 6, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Lomas, J.The consensus process and evidence dissemination. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1986, 134, 1340–41.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Perry, S.The NIH consensus development program. New England Journal of Medicine, 1987, 317, 485–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Perry, S.Consensus development: An historical note. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 1988, 4, 481–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Retchin, S. M., Fletcher, R. H., Buescher, P. C et al. , The application of policy: Prophylaxis recommendations for patients with mitral valve prolapse. Medical Care, 1985, 23, 1156–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Rogers, E. M.Diffusion of innovations, 3rd ed.New York: Free Press, 1983.Google Scholar
21.Romm, F. J., Fletcher, S. W., & Hulka, B. S.The periodic health examination: Comparison of recommendations and internists’ performance. Southern Medical Journal, 1981, 74, 265–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Sadowsky, D., & Kunzel, C.Clinician compliance and the prevention of bacterial endocarditis. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1984, 109, 425–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Sadowsky, D., & and Kunzel, C.Recommendations for prevention of bacterial endocarditis: Compliance by dental general practitioners. Circulation, 1988, 77, 1316–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Stinson, E. R., & Mueller, D. A.Survey of health professionals’ information habits and needs. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1980, 243, 140–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Stross, J. K., & Harlan, W. R.The dissemination of new medical information. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1979, 241, 2622–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Stross, J. R., & Harlan, W. R.Dissemination of relevant information on hypertension. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1981, 246, 360–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.The Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1977, 237, 255–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.The Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: The 1980 Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1980, 140, 1280–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.The 1984 Joint National Committee: The 1984 Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1984, 144, 1045–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.The 1988 Joint National Committee. The 1988 Report of The Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1988, 148, 1023–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Thompson, G. E., Alderman, M. H., Wasserteil-Smoller, S. et al. , High blood pressure diagnosis and treatment. American Journal of Public Health, 1981, 71, 413–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Weisman, C. S., Celantano, D. C., Hill, M. N. et al. , Pap testing: Opinion and practice among young obstetrician-gynecologists. Preventive Medicine, 1986, 15, 342–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Woo, B., Woo, B., Cook, E. E et al. , Screening procedures in the asymptomatic adult: Comparison of physicians’ recommendations, patients’ desires, published guidelines, and actual practice. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1985, 254, 1480–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34.Wortman, P. M., Vinokur, A., & Sechrest, L.Do consensus conferences work? A process evaluation of the NIH consensus development program. Journal of Health Policy and Law 1988, 13, 469–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar