author_facet Bösner, Stefan
Abushi, Jamal
Feufel, Markus
Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
Bösner, Stefan
Abushi, Jamal
Feufel, Markus
Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
author Bösner, Stefan
Abushi, Jamal
Feufel, Markus
Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
spellingShingle Bösner, Stefan
Abushi, Jamal
Feufel, Markus
Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
BMJ Open
Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
General Medicine
author_sort bösner, stefan
spelling Bösner, Stefan Abushi, Jamal Feufel, Markus Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert 2044-6055 2044-6055 BMJ General Medicine http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222 <jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>We sought to explore differences and commonalities between diagnostic strategies used by clinicians in general practice and the emergency department.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>Qualitative study.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Settings</jats:title><jats:p>We videotaped 282 consultations of 12 general practitioners (GPs) in Germany, irrespective of presenting complaint or final diagnosis. Reflective interviews were performed after each consultation. In addition, 171 consultations of 16 emergency physicians (EPs) based at two tertiary care hospitals in the Midwest of the USA were observed, and their conversations recorded. Recordings of consultations and GP interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a coding system that was based on published literature and systematically checked for reliability.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>EPs more often considered acute and severe conditions, even if pretest probabilities were low. In contrast, GPs more often involved their patients in the decision-making process and provided assurance concerning their complaints. To focus their workup, EPs used a more directive style of interviewing including a high proportion of routine questions and rarely used open questions or active listening.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Strategies used by physicians in both settings seem to be well adapted to their respective environments. Whereas the physician-led diagnostic process in the emergency department is well suited to rule out life-threating disease, diagnosis and appropriate treatment of everyday problems may require a more patient-centred style.</jats:p></jats:sec> Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis BMJ Open
doi_str_mv 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222
facet_avail Online
Free
format ElectronicArticle
fullrecord blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTEzNi9ibWpvcGVuLTIwMTgtMDI2MjIy
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTEzNi9ibWpvcGVuLTIwMTgtMDI2MjIy
institution DE-Bn3
DE-Brt1
DE-D161
DE-Zwi2
DE-Gla1
DE-Zi4
DE-15
DE-Pl11
DE-Rs1
DE-105
DE-14
DE-Ch1
DE-L229
DE-D275
imprint BMJ, 2019
imprint_str_mv BMJ, 2019
issn 2044-6055
issn_str_mv 2044-6055
language English
mega_collection BMJ (CrossRef)
match_str bosner2019diagnosticstrategiesingeneralpracticeandtheemergencydepartmentacomparativequalitativeanalysis
publishDateSort 2019
publisher BMJ
recordtype ai
record_format ai
series BMJ Open
source_id 49
title Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_unstemmed Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_full Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_short Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_sort diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
topic General Medicine
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222
publishDate 2019
physical e026222
description <jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>We sought to explore differences and commonalities between diagnostic strategies used by clinicians in general practice and the emergency department.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>Qualitative study.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Settings</jats:title><jats:p>We videotaped 282 consultations of 12 general practitioners (GPs) in Germany, irrespective of presenting complaint or final diagnosis. Reflective interviews were performed after each consultation. In addition, 171 consultations of 16 emergency physicians (EPs) based at two tertiary care hospitals in the Midwest of the USA were observed, and their conversations recorded. Recordings of consultations and GP interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a coding system that was based on published literature and systematically checked for reliability.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>EPs more often considered acute and severe conditions, even if pretest probabilities were low. In contrast, GPs more often involved their patients in the decision-making process and provided assurance concerning their complaints. To focus their workup, EPs used a more directive style of interviewing including a high proportion of routine questions and rarely used open questions or active listening.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Strategies used by physicians in both settings seem to be well adapted to their respective environments. Whereas the physician-led diagnostic process in the emergency department is well suited to rule out life-threating disease, diagnosis and appropriate treatment of everyday problems may require a more patient-centred style.</jats:p></jats:sec>
container_issue 5
container_start_page 0
container_title BMJ Open
container_volume 9
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
_version_ 1792340255396855819
geogr_code not assigned
last_indexed 2024-03-01T16:01:06.018Z
geogr_code_person not assigned
openURL url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=Diagnostic+strategies+in+general+practice+and+the+emergency+department%3A+a+comparative+qualitative+analysis&rft.date=2019-05-01&genre=article&issn=2044-6055&volume=9&issue=5&pages=e026222&jtitle=BMJ+Open&atitle=Diagnostic+strategies+in+general+practice+and+the+emergency+department%3A+a+comparative+qualitative+analysis&aulast=Donner-Banzhoff&aufirst=Norbert&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1136%2Fbmjopen-2018-026222&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng
SOLR
_version_ 1792340255396855819
author Bösner, Stefan, Abushi, Jamal, Feufel, Markus, Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
author_facet Bösner, Stefan, Abushi, Jamal, Feufel, Markus, Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert, Bösner, Stefan, Abushi, Jamal, Feufel, Markus, Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert
author_sort bösner, stefan
container_issue 5
container_start_page 0
container_title BMJ Open
container_volume 9
description <jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>We sought to explore differences and commonalities between diagnostic strategies used by clinicians in general practice and the emergency department.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>Qualitative study.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Settings</jats:title><jats:p>We videotaped 282 consultations of 12 general practitioners (GPs) in Germany, irrespective of presenting complaint or final diagnosis. Reflective interviews were performed after each consultation. In addition, 171 consultations of 16 emergency physicians (EPs) based at two tertiary care hospitals in the Midwest of the USA were observed, and their conversations recorded. Recordings of consultations and GP interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a coding system that was based on published literature and systematically checked for reliability.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>EPs more often considered acute and severe conditions, even if pretest probabilities were low. In contrast, GPs more often involved their patients in the decision-making process and provided assurance concerning their complaints. To focus their workup, EPs used a more directive style of interviewing including a high proportion of routine questions and rarely used open questions or active listening.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Strategies used by physicians in both settings seem to be well adapted to their respective environments. Whereas the physician-led diagnostic process in the emergency department is well suited to rule out life-threating disease, diagnosis and appropriate treatment of everyday problems may require a more patient-centred style.</jats:p></jats:sec>
doi_str_mv 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222
facet_avail Online, Free
format ElectronicArticle
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
geogr_code not assigned
geogr_code_person not assigned
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTEzNi9ibWpvcGVuLTIwMTgtMDI2MjIy
imprint BMJ, 2019
imprint_str_mv BMJ, 2019
institution DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-D161, DE-Zwi2, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229, DE-D275
issn 2044-6055
issn_str_mv 2044-6055
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-01T16:01:06.018Z
match_str bosner2019diagnosticstrategiesingeneralpracticeandtheemergencydepartmentacomparativequalitativeanalysis
mega_collection BMJ (CrossRef)
physical e026222
publishDate 2019
publishDateSort 2019
publisher BMJ
record_format ai
recordtype ai
series BMJ Open
source_id 49
spelling Bösner, Stefan Abushi, Jamal Feufel, Markus Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert 2044-6055 2044-6055 BMJ General Medicine http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222 <jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>We sought to explore differences and commonalities between diagnostic strategies used by clinicians in general practice and the emergency department.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>Qualitative study.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Settings</jats:title><jats:p>We videotaped 282 consultations of 12 general practitioners (GPs) in Germany, irrespective of presenting complaint or final diagnosis. Reflective interviews were performed after each consultation. In addition, 171 consultations of 16 emergency physicians (EPs) based at two tertiary care hospitals in the Midwest of the USA were observed, and their conversations recorded. Recordings of consultations and GP interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a coding system that was based on published literature and systematically checked for reliability.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>EPs more often considered acute and severe conditions, even if pretest probabilities were low. In contrast, GPs more often involved their patients in the decision-making process and provided assurance concerning their complaints. To focus their workup, EPs used a more directive style of interviewing including a high proportion of routine questions and rarely used open questions or active listening.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Strategies used by physicians in both settings seem to be well adapted to their respective environments. Whereas the physician-led diagnostic process in the emergency department is well suited to rule out life-threating disease, diagnosis and appropriate treatment of everyday problems may require a more patient-centred style.</jats:p></jats:sec> Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis BMJ Open
spellingShingle Bösner, Stefan, Abushi, Jamal, Feufel, Markus, Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert, BMJ Open, Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis, General Medicine
title Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_full Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_fullStr Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_short Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_sort diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
title_unstemmed Diagnostic strategies in general practice and the emergency department: a comparative qualitative analysis
topic General Medicine
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026222