↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting general practitioners' decisions about plain radiography for back pain: implications for classification of guideline barriers – a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2003
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Factors affecting general practitioners' decisions about plain radiography for back pain: implications for classification of guideline barriers – a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2003
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-3-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ansgar Espeland, Anders Baerheim

Abstract

General practitioners often diverge from clinical guidelines regarding spine radiography. This study aimed to identify and describe A) factors general practitioners consider may affect their decisions about ordering plain radiography for back pain and B) barriers to guideline adherence suggested by such factors. Focus group interviews regarding factors affecting ordering decisions were carried out on a diverse sample of Norwegian general practitioners and were analysed qualitatively. Results of this study and two qualitative studies from the Netherlands and USA on use of spine radiography were interpreted for barriers to guideline adherence. These were compared with an existing barrier classification system described by Dr Cabana's group. The factors which Norwegian general practitioners considered might affect their decisions about ordering plain radiography for back pain concerned the following broader issues: clinical ordering criteria, patients' wishes for radiography and the general practitioner's response, uncertainty, professional dignity, access to radiology services, perception of whether the patient really was ill, sense of pressure from other health care providers/social security, and expectations about the consequences of ordering radiography. The three studies suggested several attitude-related and external barriers as classified in a previously reported system described by Dr Cabana in another study. Identified barriers not listed in this system were: lack of expectancy that guideline adherence will lead to desired health care process, emotional difficulty with adherence, improper access to actual/alternative health care services, and pressure from health care providers/organisations. Our findings may help implement spine radiography guidelines. They also indicate that Cabana et al.'s barrier classification system needs extending. A revised system is proposed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 109 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Student > Master 13 12%
Other 7 6%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 23 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 29%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Psychology 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 33 29%