» Articles » PMID: 30395554

Second Opinions in Psychiatry: A Review

Overview
Specialty Psychiatry
Date 2018 Nov 6
PMID 30395554
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Although second opinions are rather restricted to the surgical disciplines, they have become more and more important to the health system in the last 20 years. The demand has been triggered by rising health costs and the economization of the field. The Internet has also made a considerable contribution to the demand for patient-initiated second opinions. Given these developments, it is surprising that second opinions have not become more important in the field of psychiatry. This article highlights the special situation of second opinions in psychiatry, discusses possible barriers to the adoption of second opinions in psychiatry, and the potential for greater use of second opinions in this field.

Objective: In psychiatry, second opinions have been neglected by the typical drivers of innovations in health care, including insurers and other commercial drivers as well as psychiatrists and patients themselves. This review identifies current barriers to widespread adoption of second opinions in psychiatric practice, discusses the benefits of second opinions that have been demonstrated in other disciplines, and outlines the potential gains to be realized through use of second opinions in psychiatry.

Methods: Literature in the area was reviewed through a search of the main medical databases. This literature review was supported by in-depth interviews with health care personnel and insurers.

Conclusions: Second opinions are rarely obtained in psychiatry and there is little literature on this subject. The stigmatization of psychiatric disorders and patients and the uniqueness of the patient-doctor relationship in psychiatry, especially in psychotherapeutic care, may pose considerable obstacles to the use of second opinions in this field. In addition, more stakeholders, such as social workers, government agencies and regulators, health care and disability insurers, and social security agencies, are involved in the mental health compared with the somatic health sector, which may make it more difficult to achieve a coordinated approach in psychiatric care. However, we have found no convincingly good reason why second opinions have not been at least discussed in psychiatry. Psychiatry could benefit from ongoing discussions concerning the outcomes of second opinions in other medical disciplines.

Citing Articles

Do compulsory mental health patients have a right to receive a second opinion on their treatment under Australian mental health legislation?.

Boyle S, Cockburn E, Mandeville B Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2024; 58(11):927-929.

PMID: 39095943 PMC: 11497731. DOI: 10.1177/00048674241267219.


Predictive factors of diagnostic and therapeutic divergence in a nationwide cohort of patients seeking second medical opinion.

Sanchez S, Adamowicz I, Chrusciel J, Denormandie P, Denys P, Degos L BMC Health Serv Res. 2021; 21(1):902.

PMID: 34470642 PMC: 8408960. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06936-w.

References
1.
Peebles R . Second opinions and cost-effectiveness: the questions continue. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1991; 76(6):18-25. View

2.
Chu A, Lavoie V, McCARTHY E . Second opinion programs: continued savings from nonconfirmed surgeries. Empl Benefits J. 1992; 17(3):35-40. View

3.
Wagner T, Wagner L . Who gets second opinions?. Health Aff (Millwood). 1999; 18(5):137-45. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.18.5.137. View

4.
Kronz J, Westra W, Epstein J . Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer. 1999; 86(11):2426-35. View

5.
Winker M, Flanagin A, White J, Andrews K, Kennett R, DeAngelis C . Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA. 2000; 283(12):1600-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.283.12.1600. View