Skip to main content
Study

Evaluation of outcomes from a national patient-initiated second-opinion program.

Meyer AND, Singh H, Graber ML. Evaluation of Outcomes From a National Patient-initiated Second-opinion Program. Am J Med. 2015;128(10). doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.04.020.

Save

Print

June 24, 2015
Meyer AND, Singh H, Graber ML. Am J Med. 2015;128.

Diagnostic errors can lead to delayed or incorrect treatments, resulting in serious patient harms. Many patients seek second opinions in an attempt to mitigate this problem; however, the impact of these patient-initiated second opinions on outcomes has not been well defined. This study examined data from a large nationally administered program that allows patients to request second opinions from expert specialists. Second opinions led to a change in diagnosis or treatment in more than 40% of participants. The second opinion was judged to have moderate or major clinical impact on patients' diagnoses in approximately 21% of cases and on treatments in nearly 31%. It is not clear how often the second opinions were correct and whether they actually led to better patient outcomes. Even though 95% of participants were satisfied with the second opinion experience, only 61% planned to follow the expert's recommendation. As diagnostic errors garner more attention in patient safety, evaluating second opinion programs may help reveal patterns for identifying these types of errors.

Save

Print

Cite
Citation

Meyer AND, Singh H, Graber ML. Evaluation of Outcomes From a National Patient-initiated Second-opinion Program. Am J Med. 2015;128(10). doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2015.04.020.