The concept of a second opinion in psychiatry

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The article analyses the “second opinion” strategy, which involves providing patients with the opportunity to obtain a second (different) opinion from a qualified specialist in cases where patients are not sure of the correctness of their diagnosis or want to consider other treatment options. The use of “second opinion” in general medicine and in psychiatry is compared. It is pointed out that it is rare to get a “second opinion” in psychiatry, and there is very little scientific research on this issue in both general and forensic psychiatry. It is concluded that the lack of demand for the concept of “second opinion” on the part of psychiatrists is associated with many factors, in particular with the prevalence of diagnostic and therapeutic relativism. It is argued that psychiatrists should reconsider their attitude to the concept of “second opinion”, gain communication skills with patients on the topics of substantiating the correctness of their own diagnostic conclusion and create criteria for an objective assessment of the qualifications of doctors.

About the authors

Vladimir D. Mendelevich

Kazan State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: mendelevich_vl@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8476-6083
SPIN-code: 2302-2590
https://kazangmu.ru/psychiatry/sotrudniki-kafedry

M.D., D. Sci. (Med.), Prof., Head of the Depart., Depart. of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology

Russian Federation, Kazan

References

  1. Trachtman L. The legal reality of issuing second opinions for out of state patients. Purview. April 5. 2023. https://www.purview.net/blog/the-legal-reality-of-issuing-second-opinions-for-out-of-state-patients (access date: 12.07.2023).
  2. Ball CG, Schieman C, Harvey EJ. The art of second opinion. Can J Surg. 2023;66(3). doi: 10.1503/cjs.007423.
  3. Kempt H, Nagel SK. Responsibility, second opinions and peer-disagreement: Ethical and epistemological challenges of using AI in clinical diagnostic contexts. J Med Ethics. 2022;(48):222–229.
  4. Könsgen N, Prediger B, Schlimbach A et al. Attitude toward second opinions in Germany — a survey of the general population. BMC Health Services Research. 2022;22:76. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07422-z.
  5. Shmueli L, Davidovitch N, Pliskin JS et al. Seeking a second medical opinion: Composition, reasons and perceived outcomes in Israel. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research. 2017;6:67. doi: 10.1186/s13584-017-0191-y.
  6. Barclay RP, Dillon-Naftolin E, Russell D, Hilt RJ. A second-opinion program for the care of youths prescribed five or more psychotropics in Washington State. Psychiatric Services. 2021;72:362–365. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.202000234.
  7. Ploug T, Holm S. The right to a second opinion on Artificial Intelligence diagnosis — Remedying the inadequacy of a risk-based regulation. Bioethics. 2023;37:303–311. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13124.
  8. Greenfield G, Shmueli L, Harvey A. Patient-initiated second medical consultations — patient characteristics and motivating factors, impact on care and satisfaction: A systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e044033. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044033.
  9. Second opinion. PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=second+opinion&sort=date (access date: 12.07.2023).
  10. Bruch D, May S, Prediger B. Second opinion programmes in Germany: A mixed-methods study protocol. BMJ Open. 2021;(11):e045264. DOI: 10.1136/ bmjopen-2020-045264.
  11. Sah S, Loewenstein G. Conflicted advice and second opinions: Benefits, but unintended consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2015;130:89–107. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.005.
  12. Halasy M, Shafrin J. When should You trust Your doctor? Establishing a theoretical model to evaluate the value of second opinion visits. Mayo Clin Proc Inn Qual Out. 2021;5(2):502–510. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2021.01.014.
  13. Burger PM, Westerink J, Vrijsen BEL. Outcomes of second opinions in general internal medicine. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(7):e0236048. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236048.
  14. Ali J, Pieper D. Limited data for second opinion programs: A systematic review. Gesundheitswesen. 2017;79(10):871–874. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-108586.
  15. Ruetters D, Keinki Ch, Schroth S et al. Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016;142(7):1521–1528. doi: 10.1007/s00432-015-2099-7.
  16. Carr N. Is the second opinion always better than the first? Pathology. 2010;42(5):498; author reply 498–499. doi: 10.3109/00313025.2010.494295.
  17. of the Best Psychiatrists in The United States. https://www.medifind.com/specialty/psychiatry/US (access date: 12.07.2023).
  18. Diagnoses That Call for a Second Opinion. https://www.webmd.com/women/features/5_diagnoses-that-call-for-a-second-opinion (access date: 12.07.2023).
  19. Cohen-Gadol A. Insurance coverage for second opinions. https://www.aaroncohen-gadol.com/patients/second-opinion/logistics/insurance-coverage (access date: 12.07.2023).
  20. Rutter LA, Howard J, Lakhan P et al. “I haven’t been diagnosed, but I should be” — insight into self-diagnoses of common mental health disorders: Cross-sectional study. JMIR Form Res. 2023;(7):e39206. doi: 10.2196/39206.
  21. Giles DC, Newbold J. Self- and other-diagnosis in user-led mental health online communities. Qual Health Res. 2011;21:419 doi: 10.1177/1049732310381388.
  22. Buzina TS, Buzin VN, Lanskoĭ IL. Vrach i pacient: mezhlichnostnye kommunikacii/ Medicinskaya psihologiya v Rossii. 2020;12(4):2. (In Russ.) doi: 10.24412/2219-8245- 2020-4-2.
  23. Benbassat J. Obtaining a second opinion is a neglected source of health care inequalities. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2019;16(8(1)):12. doi: 10.1186/s13584-019-0289-5.
  24. Mendelevich VD. Terminologicheskie osnovy fenomenologicheskoj diagnostiki v psihiatrii. M.: Gorodec; 2016. 128 p. (In Russ.)
  25. Heuss SC, Schwartz BJ, Schneeberger AR. Second opinions in psychiatry: A review. Journal of Psychiatric Practice. 2018;24:434–442. doi: 10.1097/PRA.0000000000000343.
  26. Sepahpour TY, Chin K, Baker KK et al. Parental perceptions of second opinion consultations for recent onset schizophrenia. Early Intervention in Psychiatry. 2023:1–6. doi: 10.1111/eip.13406.
  27. Silva E, Till A, Adshead G. Ethical dilemmas in psychiatry: When teams disagree. B J Psych Advances. 2017;23:231–239. doi: 10.1192/apt.bp.116.016147.
  28. Nirodi P, Mitchell AJ, Mindham HS. Survey of expert second opinions in a tertiary psychiatric out-patient clinic in the Yorkshire region between 1988 and 2000. Psychiatric Bulletin. 2003;27:416–420.
  29. Neznanov NG, Martynihin IA, Mosolov SN. Diagnostika i terapiya trevozhnyh rasstrojstv v Rossijskoj Federacii: rezul’taty oprosa vrachej-psihiatrov. Sovremennaya terapiya psihicheskih rasstrojstv. 2017;(2):2–13. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21265/PSYPH.2017.41.6437.
  30. Mendelevich VD. Spektry psihicheskih rasstrojstv i problema terapevticheskogo relyativizma. Nevrologicheskij vestnik. 2017;(4):11–20. (In Russ.)
  31. Taylor D. Prescribing according to diagnosis: how psychiatry is different. World Psychiatry. 2016;15(3):224–225. doi: 10.1002/wps.20343.
  32. Neznanov NG, Martynihin IA, Mosolov SN. Diagnostika shizofrenii v Rossii: rezul’taty onlajn-oprosa vrachej-psihiatrov Chast’ 1. Ispol’zovanie MKB-10. Sovremennaya terapiya psihicheskih rasstrojstv. 2019;(1):2–19. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21265/PSYPH.2019.24.24.001.
  33. Freedman R, Lewis DA, Michels R et al. The initial field trials of DSM-5: new blooms and old thorns. Am J Psychiatry. 2013;170(1):1–5. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12091189.
  34. Chao Y-S, Wu C-J, Lai Y-C et al. Why mental illness diagnoses are wrong: A pilot study on the perspectives of the public. Front Psychiatry. 2022;13:860487. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.860487.
  35. Mendelevich VD. Chto daet pacientu psihiatricheskij diagnoz i obosnovan li trend na uvelichenie chisla boleznej? Nevrologicheskij vestnik. 2019;(1):52–54. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17816/nb13560.
  36. Mendelevich VD. Sostyazatel’nost’ storon v sudebnom processe, svyazannom s ocenkoĭ psihicheskogo zdorov’ya uchastnikov. Nevrologicheskij vestnik. 2020;(2):79–82. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17816/nb25852.
  37. Abdulmazhidov MM, Gromov AM, Cherezov IA et al. Programmnoe obespechenie “Platforma tret’e mnenie”. Svidetel’stvo o gosudarstvennoj registracii programmy dlya EVM. Nomer svidetel’stva: RU 2023618703. Rossiya. 2023. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_53818993_84131295.PDF (дата обращения: 01.07.2023).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Dynamics of the number of scientific publications on the topic of “second opinion” (according to PubMed) [9]

Download (67KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Consistency of psychiatric diagnoses in adults (by Robert Freedman [33])

Download (286KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Consistency of psychiatric diagnoses in children (by Robert Freedman [33])

Download (198KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2023 Eco-Vector

License URL: https://eco-vector.com/for_authors.php#07

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies