Dataset Information

Surgeons underestimate their patients' desire for preoperative information.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Provision of adequate patient information may contribute to a "satisfying" surgical treatment. The patient's views on successful transfer of information concerning operative characteristics may not be in concert with the surgeon's. The aim of the present study was to determine opinions of both surgeons and patients about issues of surgical information. METHODS: A group of surgeons (n = 24) and surgical patients (n = 125) responded to a questionnaire that included 80 topics involving domains of information on disease, physical examination, preoperative period, anesthesia, operation, postoperative period, self care, and general hospital issues. Both groups were asked for their opinion on what they considered important and useful preoperative information for patients. Questions were scored with a visual analog scale. The reliability of the questionnaire was calculated with Cronbach's alpha. Differences in opinions between surgeons and patients were analyzed with Student's t-test. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha of the questionnaire was high (0.91), indicating its high reliability. Patients scored significantly higher (p < 0.001) in most domains, including preoperative period, anaesthesia, operation, postoperative period, self care, and general hospital information. Women demonstrated a significantly higher need for information than men did. These findings were independent of patient age or complexity of operation. In contrast, surgeons thought that their patients desired more extensive information on cause, effect, and prognosis of the disease itself (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Surgeons generally underestimate their patients' desire for receiving extensive information prior to a surgical procedure of any complexity. Surgeons should develop strategies to bridge this informational mismatch.

SUBMITTER: Keulers BJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2386849 | biostudies-other | 2008 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative anxiety is prevalent and has harmful effects on postoperative outcomes. However, to date, it is still unclear (i) to what extent patients perceive preoperative anxiety as emotionally distressful, (ii) whether patients would welcome support from anesthesiologists in coping with their anxiety, and (iii) whether anxiety scores are useful for everyday clinical practice to determine patients' need for support.Methods1082 patients scheduled to undergo elective procedures under general anesthesia were eligible for this cross-sectional study carried out at a university hospital. Preoperative anxiety, resulting in emotional distress, and patients' desire for anesthesiologists' support in coping with their anxiety were assessed dichotomously (no vs. yes) and analyzed descriptively. The intensity of anxiety was evaluated using the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (range 4-20). Associations between the intensity of anxiety and the resulting desire for support were analyzed using logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed to identify anxiety levels that best predict desire for support.ResultsAmong the 1000 (537 female; M (SD) 57 (18) years) subjects evaluated, 493 (318 (65 %) female) reported anxiety. Anxiety was associated with emotional distress in 320 (65 %) and desire for support in 291 (59 %) patients. Increased preoperative anxiety levels were associated with higher rates of desire for support (B= 0.270; odds ratio 1.31 [95 % CI 1.22-1.41]). An anxiety score > 9 was best to predict a desire for support (sensitivity 0.861, specificity 0.724). However, desire for support was even present in some patients with lowest anxiety scores (5 or 6).ConclusionsAll patients undergoing surgery should be screened for preoperative anxiety and the resulting desire for support to be able to determine who would welcome support. Anxiety scoring tools do not seem to be useful to identify these patients. By helping patients experience less preoperative anxiety, anesthesiologists may not only reduce patients' emotional distress but also have a positive impact on postoperative outcome.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00013319, 23 November 2017).

Project description:BackgroundBoth occupational physicians and orthopedic surgeons can be involved in the management of work relevant musculoskeletal disorders. These physicians hardly communicate with each other and this might lead to different advice to the patient. Therefore, we evaluated a standardized information exchange form for the exchange of relevant information between the orthopedic surgeon and the occupational physician. The main goals of this qualitative study are to evaluate whether the form improved information exchange, whether the form gave relevant information, and to generate ideas to further improve this information exchange.MethodsThe information exchange form was developed in two consensus meetings with five orthopedic surgeons and five occupational physicians. To evaluate the information exchange form, a qualitative evaluation was set up. Structured telephone interviews were undertaken with the patients, interviews with the physicians were face-to-face and semi-structured, based on a topic list. These interviews were recorded and literally transcribed. Each interview was analyzed separately in Atlas-Ti.ResultsThe form was used for 8 patients, 7 patients agreed to participate in the qualitative evaluation. All three orthopedic surgeons involved and three of the six involved occupational physicians agreed to be interviewed. The form was transferred to 4 occupational physicians, the other 3 patients recovered before they visited the occupational physician. The information on the form was regarded to be useful. All orthopedic surgeons agreed that the occupational physician should take the initiative. Most physicians felt that the form should not be filled out for each patient visiting an orthopedic surgeon, but only for those patients who do not recover as expected. Orthopedic surgeons suggested that a copy of the medical information provided to the general practitioner could also be provided to occupational physicians.ConclusionThe information exchange form was regarded to be useful and could be used in practice. The occupational physician should take the initiative for using this form and most physicians felt the information should only be exchanged for patients who do not recover as expected. That means that the advantage of giving information early in the treatment is lost.

Project description:BackgroundThere is substantial unexplained geographical and surgeon-to-surgeon variation in rates of surgery. One would expect surgeons to treat patients and themselves similarly based on best evidence and accounting for patient preferences.Questions/purposes(1) Are surgeons more likely to recommend surgery when choosing for a patient than for themselves? (2) Are surgeons less confident in deciding for patients than for themselves?MethodsTwo hundred fifty-four (32%) of 790 Science of Variation Group (SOVG) members reviewed 21 fictional upper extremity cases (eg, distal radius fracture, De Quervain tendinopathy) for which surgery is optional answering two questions: (1) What treatment would you choose/recommend: operative or nonoperative? (2) On a scale from 0 to 10, how confident are you about this decision? Confidence is the degree that one believes that his or her decision is the right one (ie, most appropriate). Participants were orthopaedic, trauma, and plastic surgeons, all with an interest in treating upper extremity conditions. Half of the participants were randomized to choose for themselves if they had this injury or illness. The other half was randomized to make treatment recommendations for a patient of their age and gender. For the choice of operative or nonoperative, the overall recommendation for treatment was expressed as a surgery score per surgeon by dividing the number of cases they would operate on by the total number of cases (n = 21), where 100% is when every surgeon recommended surgery for every case. For confidence, we calculated the mean confidence for all 21 cases per surgeon; overall score ranges from 0 to 10 with a higher score indicating more confidence in the decision for treatment.ResultsSurgeons were more likely to recommend surgery for a patient (44.2% ± 14.0%) than they were to choose surgery for themselves (38.5% ± 15.4%) with a mean difference of 6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1%-9.4%; p = 0.002). Surgeons were more confident in deciding for themselves than they were for a patient of similar age and gender (self: 7.9 ± 1.0, patient: 7.5 ± 1.2, mean difference: 0.35 [CI, 0.075-0.62], p = 0.012).ConclusionsSurgeons are slightly more likely to recommend surgery for a patient than they are to choose surgery for themselves and they choose for themselves with a little more confidence. Different perspectives, preferences, circumstantial information, and cognitive biases might explain the observed differences. This emphasizes the importance of (1) understanding patients' preferences and their considerations for treatment; (2) being aware that surgeons and patients might weigh various factors differently; (3) giving patients more autonomy by letting them balance risks and benefits themselves (ie, shared decision-making); and (4) assessing how dispassionate evidence-based decision aids help inform the patient and influences their decisional conflict.Level of evidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.

Dataset Information

Surgeons underestimate their patients' desire for preoperative information.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets