Skip to main content
Log in

Physicians’ reasons for failing to comply with computerized preventive care guidelines

  • Brief Reports
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess reasons for physicians’ noncompliance with computer-generated preventive care reminders. In an academic general internal medicine practice, a survey of physicians’ reasons for noncompliance found that 55% of reminders were not complied with. Reasons included “not applicable” in 22.6% (test done elsewhere, patient too ill, no uterus), “next visit” in 22.5% (physician too busy, patient too ill), and “patient refuses” in 9.9% (test not necessary or too costly, patient too busy or fears result). We conclude that although noncompliance with reminders is sometimes appropriate, making time for prevention and patient education may augment preventive care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. McDonald CJ, Hui SL, Smith DM, et al. Reminders to physicians from an introspective computer medical record. A two-year randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 1984;100:130–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Tierney WM, Hui SL, McDonald CJ. Delayed feedback of physician performance versus immediate reminders to perform preventive care: effects on physician compliance. Med Care. 1986;24:659–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Litzelman DK, Dittus RS, Miller ME, Tierney WM. Requiring physicians to respond to computerized reminders improves their compliance with preventive care protocols. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8:311–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tierney WM, Miller ME, Hui SL, McDonald CJ. Practice randomization and clinical research: the Indiana experience. Med Care. 1991;29:JS57–64.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. McDonald CJ, Tierney WM, Martin DK, Overhage JM. The Regenstrief Medical Record System: 20 years’ experience in hospital outpatient clinics and neighborhood health centers. MD Comput. 1992;9:206–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. McDonald CJ. Action-Oriented Decisions in Ambulatory Medicine. Chicago, Ill: Yearbook Medical Publishers; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The periodic health examination. Can Med Assoc J. 1979;121:1193–254.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The periodic health examination 2. 1985 Update. Can Med Assoc J. 1985;134:724–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Breslow L, Somers AR. The lifetime health monitoring program: a practical approach to preventive medicine. N Engl J Med. 1977;296:601–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. American Cancer Society. Guidelines for the cancer-related checkup, recommendations, and rationale. CA. 1985;35:199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. American Cancer Society. Change in American Cancer Society check-up guidelines for detection of cervical cancer. CA. 1988;38:127–8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Black Americans’ attitudes toward cancer and cancer tests: highlights of a study. CA. 1981;31:212–8.

  13. Freeman HP, Wasfie TJ. Cancer of the breast in poor black women. Cancer. 1989;63:2562–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rimer BK, Keintz MK, Kessler HB, Engstrom PF, Rosan JR. Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related factors. Radiology. 1989;162:243–6.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Burack RC, Gimotty PA, Stengle W, Warbasse L, Moncrease A. Patterns of use of mammography among inner-city Detroit women: contrasts between a health department, HMO, and private hospital. Med Care. 1993;31:322–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received from the Department of Medicine, Wishard Memorial Hospital, and the Indiana University School of Medicine, the Regenstrief Institute for Health Care, and the Health Services Research and Development Service, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Ind.

Supported in part by grants HS07632, HS07763, and HS07719 from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR). Dr. Litzelman was supported in part by a Robert Wood Johnson Generalist Physician Faculty Scholar Award (022318).

The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the authors’ institutions, AHCPR, or the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Litzelman, D.K., Tierney, W.M. Physicians’ reasons for failing to comply with computerized preventive care guidelines. J Gen Intern Med 11, 497–499 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599049

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02599049

Key words

Navigation