Cargando…

Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices

BACKGROUND: Postmarket surveillance of medical devices is reliant on physician reporting of adverse medical device events (AMDEs). Little is known about factors that influence whether and how physicians report AMDEs, an essential step in developing behaviour change interventions. This study explored...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gagliardi, Anna R, Ducey, Ariel, Lehoux, Pascale, Turgeon, Thomas, Ross, Sue, Trbovich, Patricia, Easty, Anthony, Bell, Chaim, Urbach, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5867432/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28768712
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006481
_version_ 1783308963760046080
author Gagliardi, Anna R
Ducey, Ariel
Lehoux, Pascale
Turgeon, Thomas
Ross, Sue
Trbovich, Patricia
Easty, Anthony
Bell, Chaim
Urbach, David
author_facet Gagliardi, Anna R
Ducey, Ariel
Lehoux, Pascale
Turgeon, Thomas
Ross, Sue
Trbovich, Patricia
Easty, Anthony
Bell, Chaim
Urbach, David
author_sort Gagliardi, Anna R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Postmarket surveillance of medical devices is reliant on physician reporting of adverse medical device events (AMDEs). Little is known about factors that influence whether and how physicians report AMDEs, an essential step in developing behaviour change interventions. This study explored factors that influence AMDE reporting. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with physicians who differed by specialties that implant cardiovascular and orthopaedic devices prone to AMDEs, geography and years in practice. Participants were asked if and how they reported AMDEs, and the influencing factors. Themes were identified inductively using constant comparative technique, and reviewed and discussed by the research team on four occasions. RESULTS: Twenty-two physicians of varying specialty, region, organisation and career stage perceived AMDE reporting as unnecessary, not possible or futile due to multiple factors. Physicians viewed AMDEs as an expected part of practice that they could manage by switching to different devices or developing work-around strategies for problematic devices. Physician beliefs and behaviour were reinforced by limited healthcare system capacity and industry responsiveness. The healthcare system lacked processes and infrastructure to detect, capture, share and act on information about AMDEs, and constrained device choice through purchasing contracts. The device industry did not respond to reports of AMDEs from physicians or improve their products based on such reports. As a result, participants said they used devices that were less than ideal for a given patient, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There may be little point in solely educating or incentivising individual physicians to report AMDEs unless environmental conditions are conducive to doing so. Future research should explore policies that govern AMDEs and investigate how to design and implement postmarket surveillance systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5867432
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58674322018-03-27 Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices Gagliardi, Anna R Ducey, Ariel Lehoux, Pascale Turgeon, Thomas Ross, Sue Trbovich, Patricia Easty, Anthony Bell, Chaim Urbach, David BMJ Qual Saf Original Research BACKGROUND: Postmarket surveillance of medical devices is reliant on physician reporting of adverse medical device events (AMDEs). Little is known about factors that influence whether and how physicians report AMDEs, an essential step in developing behaviour change interventions. This study explored factors that influence AMDE reporting. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with physicians who differed by specialties that implant cardiovascular and orthopaedic devices prone to AMDEs, geography and years in practice. Participants were asked if and how they reported AMDEs, and the influencing factors. Themes were identified inductively using constant comparative technique, and reviewed and discussed by the research team on four occasions. RESULTS: Twenty-two physicians of varying specialty, region, organisation and career stage perceived AMDE reporting as unnecessary, not possible or futile due to multiple factors. Physicians viewed AMDEs as an expected part of practice that they could manage by switching to different devices or developing work-around strategies for problematic devices. Physician beliefs and behaviour were reinforced by limited healthcare system capacity and industry responsiveness. The healthcare system lacked processes and infrastructure to detect, capture, share and act on information about AMDEs, and constrained device choice through purchasing contracts. The device industry did not respond to reports of AMDEs from physicians or improve their products based on such reports. As a result, participants said they used devices that were less than ideal for a given patient, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There may be little point in solely educating or incentivising individual physicians to report AMDEs unless environmental conditions are conducive to doing so. Future research should explore policies that govern AMDEs and investigate how to design and implement postmarket surveillance systems. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-03 2017-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5867432/ /pubmed/28768712 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006481 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Original Research
Gagliardi, Anna R
Ducey, Ariel
Lehoux, Pascale
Turgeon, Thomas
Ross, Sue
Trbovich, Patricia
Easty, Anthony
Bell, Chaim
Urbach, David
Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title_full Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title_fullStr Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title_full_unstemmed Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title_short Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
title_sort factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5867432/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28768712
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006481
work_keys_str_mv AT gagliardiannar factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT duceyariel factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT lehouxpascale factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT turgeonthomas factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT rosssue factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT trbovichpatricia factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT eastyanthony factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT bellchaim factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices
AT urbachdavid factorsinfluencingthereportingofadversemedicaldeviceeventsqualitativeinterviewswithphysiciansabouthigherriskimplantabledevices