Search

Background The patient–clinician interaction is a site at which defensive practice could occur, when clinicians provide tests, procedures and treatments mainly to reduce perceived legal risks, rather than to advance patient care. Defensive practice is a driver of low‐value care and exposes patients to the risks of unnecessary interventions. To date, patient perspectives on defensive practice and its impacts on them are largely missing from the literature. This exploratory study conducted in Australia aimed to examine the views and experiences of healthcare consumer representatives in this under‐examined area. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with healthcare consumer representatives involved in healthcare consumer advocacy organisations in Australia. Data were transcribed and analysed thematically. Results Nine healthcare consumer representatives participated. Most had over 20 years of involvement and advocacy in healthcare, including personal experiences as a patient or carer and/or formal service roles on committees or complaint bodies for healthcare organisations. Participants uniformly viewed defensive practice as having a negative impact on the clinician–patient relationship. Themes identified the importance of fostering patient–clinician partnership, effective communication and informed decision‐making. The themes support a shift from the concept of defensive practice to preventive practice in partnership, which focuses on the shared interests of patients and clinicians in achieving safe and high‐value care. Conclusion This Australian study offers healthcare consumers' perspectives on the impacts of defensive practice on patients. The findings highlight the features of clinician–patient partnership that will help to improve communication and decision‐making, and prevent the defensive provision of low‐value care. Patient or Public Contribution Healthcare consumer representatives were involved as participants in this study.

A wide variety of genetic tests are now being marketed and sold in direct-to-consumer (DTC) commercial transactions. However, risk information revealed through many DTC testing services, especially those based on emerging genome wide-association studies, has limited predictive value for consumers. Some commentators contend that tests are being marketed prematurely, while others support rapid translation of genetic research findings to the marketplace. The potential harms and benefits of DTC access to genetic testing are not yet well understood, but some large-scale studies have recently been launched to examine how consumers understand and use genetic risk information. Greater consumer access to genetic tests creates a need for continuing education for health care professionals so they can respond to patients' inquiries about the benefits, risks and limitations of DTC services. Governmental bodies in many jurisdictions are considering options for regulating practices of DTC genetic testing companies, particularly to govern quality of commercial genetic tests and ensure fair and truthful advertising. Intersectoral initiatives involving government regulators, professional bodies and industry are important to facilitate development of standards to govern this rapidly developing area of personalized genomic commerce.