Liora Shmueli1, Nadav Davidovitch2, Joseph S Pliskin2,3, Ran D Balicer4, Igal Hekselman5, Geva Greenfield6. 1. Department of Health Systems Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O. Box 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel. liora.jana@gmail.com. 2. Department of Health Systems Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O. Box 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 3. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O. Box 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 4. Clalit Research Institute, Clalit Health Services, 101 Arlozorov, 62098, Tel-Aviv, Israel. 5. Clalit Mushlam Health Insurance Systems, Clalit Health Services, 1 Ben Gurion, 5120149, Bnei Brak, Israel. 6. Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, The Reynolds Building, St. Dunstan's Road, London, W6 8RP, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Seeking a second-opinion (SO) is a common clinical practice that can optimize treatment and reduce unnecessary procedures and risks. We aim to characterize the composition of the population of SO seekers, their reasons for seeking a SO and choosing a specific physician, and their perceived outcomes following the SO. METHODS: A cross-sectional national telephone survey, using a representative sample of the general Israeli population (n = 848, response rate = 62%). SO utilization was defined as seeking an additional clinical opinion from a specialist within the same specialty, for the same medical concern. We describe the characteristics of respondents who obtained SOs, their reasons for doing so and their perceived outcomes: (1) Satisfaction with the SO; (2) Experiencing health improvement after receiving a SO; (3) A difference in the diagnosis or treatment suggested in the first opinions and the second opinions; (4) Preference of the SO over the first one. RESULTS: Most of the respondents who sought a SO (n = 344) were above 60 years old, secular, living with a partner, perceived their income to be above average and their health status to be not so good. For the patients who utilized SOs, orthopedic surgeons were sought out more than any other medical professional.Reasons for seeking a SO included doubts about diagnosis or treatment (38%), search for a sub-specialty expert (19%) and dissatisfaction with communication (19%). SO seekers most frequently chose a specific specialist based on a recommendation from a friend or a relative (33%). About half of the SO seekers also searched for information on the internet. Most of the respondents who sought a SO mentioned that they were satisfied with it (84%), felt health improvement (77%), mentioned that there was a difference between the diagnosis or treatment between the first opinion and the SO (56%) and preferred the SO over the first one (91%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical uncertainty or dissatisfaction with patient-physician communication were the main reasons for seeking a SO. Policy makers should be aware that many patients choose a physician for a SO based on recommendations made outside the medical system. We recommend creating mechanisms that help patients in the complicated process of seeking a SO, suggest specialists who are suitable for the specific medical problem of the patient, and provide tools to reconcile discrepant opinions.
BACKGROUND: Seeking a second-opinion (SO) is a common clinical practice that can optimize treatment and reduce unnecessary procedures and risks. We aim to characterize the composition of the population of SO seekers, their reasons for seeking a SO and choosing a specific physician, and their perceived outcomes following the SO. METHODS: A cross-sectional national telephone survey, using a representative sample of the general Israeli population (n = 848, response rate = 62%). SO utilization was defined as seeking an additional clinical opinion from a specialist within the same specialty, for the same medical concern. We describe the characteristics of respondents who obtained SOs, their reasons for doing so and their perceived outcomes: (1) Satisfaction with the SO; (2) Experiencing health improvement after receiving a SO; (3) A difference in the diagnosis or treatment suggested in the first opinions and the second opinions; (4) Preference of the SO over the first one. RESULTS: Most of the respondents who sought a SO (n = 344) were above 60 years old, secular, living with a partner, perceived their income to be above average and their health status to be not so good. For the patients who utilized SOs, orthopedic surgeons were sought out more than any other medical professional.Reasons for seeking a SO included doubts about diagnosis or treatment (38%), search for a sub-specialty expert (19%) and dissatisfaction with communication (19%). SO seekers most frequently chose a specific specialist based on a recommendation from a friend or a relative (33%). About half of the SO seekers also searched for information on the internet. Most of the respondents who sought a SO mentioned that they were satisfied with it (84%), felt health improvement (77%), mentioned that there was a difference between the diagnosis or treatment between the first opinion and the SO (56%) and preferred the SO over the first one (91%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical uncertainty or dissatisfaction with patient-physician communication were the main reasons for seeking a SO. Policy makers should be aware that many patients choose a physician for a SO based on recommendations made outside the medical system. We recommend creating mechanisms that help patients in the complicated process of seeking a SO, suggest specialists who are suitable for the specific medical problem of the patient, and provide tools to reconcile discrepant opinions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Health policy; Health seeking behaviors; Patient-physician communication; Second opinion; Survey
Authors: G Oskay-Ozcelik; W Lehmacher; D Könsgen; H Christ; M Kaufmann; W Lichtenegger; M Bamberg; D Wallwiener; F Overkamp; K Diedrich; G von Minckwitz; K Höffken; S Seeber; R Mirz; J Sehouli Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: S N Rosenberg; D R Allen; J S Handte; T C Jackson; L Leto; B M Rodstein; S D Stratton; G Westfall; R Yasser Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susann May; Dunja Bruch; Felix Muehlensiepen; Yuriy Ignatyev; Edmund Neugebauer; Cecile Ronckers; Sebastian von Peter Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Sandra Gattas; Gianna M Fote; Nolan J Brown; Brian V Lien; Elliot H Choi; Alvin Y Chan; Charles D Rosen; Michael Y Oh Journal: Surg Neurol Int Date: 2021-08-30
Authors: Liora Shmueli; Erez Shmueli; Joseph S Pliskin; Ran D Balicer; Nadav Davidovitch; Igal Hekselman; Geva Greenfield Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-07-27 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Nadja Könsgen; Barbara Prediger; Anna Schlimbach; Ana-Mihaela Bora; Simone Hess; Michael Caspers; Dawid Pieper Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-01-15 Impact factor: 2.655