Janssen Stein J, Teunis Teun, Guitton Thierry G, Ring David
Department of Hand Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Yawkey Center, Suite 2100, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Nov;473(11):3564-72. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4304-z.
There 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?
Two 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.
Surgeons 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).
Surgeons 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 III, diagnostic study.
手术率存在大量无法解释的地域差异以及外科医生之间的差异。人们期望外科医生根据最佳证据并考虑患者偏好,以相似的方式治疗患者和自己。
问题/目的:(1)外科医生为患者选择治疗方案时比为自己选择时更倾向于推荐手术吗?(2)外科医生为患者做决定时比为自己做决定时信心更低吗?
790名变异科学小组(SOVG)成员中的254名(32%)回顾了21个虚构的上肢病例(如桡骨远端骨折、桡骨茎突狭窄性腱鞘炎),这些病例手术并非必需,他们要回答两个问题:(1)你会选择/推荐哪种治疗:手术还是非手术?(2)从0到10打分,你对这个决定有多大信心?信心是指一个人认为自己的决定是正确的(即最合适的)程度。参与者为骨科、创伤科和整形外科医生,均对治疗上肢疾病感兴趣。一半参与者被随机分配,如果自己患有这种伤病会如何选择。另一半被随机分配为与他们年龄和性别相同的患者给出治疗建议。对于手术或非手术的选择,每位外科医生的总体治疗建议通过将他们建议手术的病例数除以病例总数(n = 21)得出手术评分,100%表示每位外科医生对每个病例都推荐手术。对于信心,我们计算了每位外科医生对所有21个病例的平均信心;总体评分范围为0到10,分数越高表明对治疗决定的信心越大。
外科医生为患者推荐手术的可能性(44.2% ± 14.0%)高于为自己选择手术的可能性(38.5% ± 15.4%),平均差异为6%(95%置信区间[CI],2.1% - 9.4%;p = 0.002)。外科医生为自己做决定时比为年龄和性别相似的患者做决定时更有信心(自己:7.9 ± 1.0,患者:7.5 ± 1.2,平均差异:0.35 [CI,0.075 - 0.62],p = 0.012)。
外科医生为患者推荐手术的可能性略高于为自己选择手术,且为自己做决定时信心稍高。不同的观点、偏好、具体情况信息和认知偏差可能解释了观察到的差异。这强调了以下几点的重要性:(1)了解患者的偏好及其对治疗的考虑;(2)意识到外科医生和患者可能对各种因素的权衡不同;(3)通过让患者自己权衡风险和益处给予患者更多自主权(即共同决策);(4)评估客观的循证决策辅助工具如何帮助患者了解情况并影响他们的决策冲突。
III级,诊断性研究。