Better Health: Smart Health Commentary Better Health (TM): smart health commentary

Article Comments (2)

Understanding Treatment: The Communication Disconnect Between Doctors And Patients

Over the long week­end I caught up on some read­ing. One arti­cle* stands out. It’s on informed con­sent, and the stun­ning dis­con­nect between physi­cians’ and patients’ under­stand­ing of a procedure’s value.

The study, pub­lished in the Sept 7th Annals of Inter­nal Med­i­cine, used sur­vey meth­ods to eval­u­ate 153 car­di­ol­ogy patients’ under­stand­ing of the poten­tial ben­e­fit of per­cu­ta­neous coro­nary inter­ven­tion (PCI or angio­plasty). The inves­ti­ga­tors, at Baystate Med­ical Cen­ter in Mass­a­chu­setts, com­pared patients’ responses to those of car­di­ol­o­gists who obtained con­sent and who per­formed the pro­ce­dure. As out­lined in the article’s intro­duc­tion, PCI reduces heart attacks in patients with acute coro­nary syn­drome — a more unsta­ble sit­u­a­tion than is chronic sta­ble angina, in which case PCI relieves pain and improves qual­ity of life but has no ben­e­fit in terms of recur­rent myocar­dial infarc­tion (MI) or survival.

The main result was that, after dis­cussing the pro­ce­dure with a car­di­ol­o­gist and sign­ing the form, 88 percent of the patients, who almost all had chronic sta­ble angina, believed that PCI would reduce their per­sonal risk for hav­ing a heart attack. Only 17 percent of the car­di­ol­o­gists, who com­pleted sur­veys about these par­tic­u­lar patients and the poten­tial ben­e­fit of PCI for patients fac­ing sim­i­lar sce­nar­ios, indi­cated that PCI would reduce the like­li­hood of MI.

This strik­ing dif­fer­ence in patients’ and doc­tors’ per­cep­tions is all the more sig­nif­i­cant because 96 percent of the patients “felt that they knew why they might undergo PCI, and more than half stated that they were actively involved in the decision-making.”

What we have here is a study of informed con­sent, set up in a way that the doc­tors knew the study was ongo­ing — because they and their patients were par­tic­i­pat­ing, all in one divi­sion of one hos­pi­tal — and pre­sum­ably spent, if anything, more time and not less than usual talk­ing with patients and answer­ing ques­tions about the pro­ce­dure. (Note: this par­tic­u­lar point is an assump­tion on my part, sup­ported by the reported fact that 83 percent of the patients reported that their ques­tions had been answered.)

The cen­tral find­ing is a fail­ure of com­mu­ni­ca­tion between doc­tors and patients about the poten­tial ben­e­fit of the pro­ce­dure: 88 percent of the patients, who’d signed con­sent, thought that PCI would pre­vent heart attacks and only 17 percent of the car­di­ol­o­gists at the same med­ical cen­ter thought the same. This mat­ters, first, because over a mil­lion peo­ple in the U.S. undergo angio­plasty each year and, more broadly, because it rep­re­sents an every­day out­growth of the  phe­nom­e­non of ther­a­peu­tic mis­con­cep­tion — when patients think a pro­ce­dure has a greater poten­tial ben­e­fit than it does.

The con­cept of  ther­a­peu­tic mis­con­cep­tion, as was ini­tially defined nar­rowly in the con­text of clin­i­cal tri­als, applies to all areas of med­i­cine. In can­cer treat­ment it’s a big deal but, in my expe­ri­ence, under-addressed. A com­mon mis­con­cep­tion among breast can­cer patients, for exam­ple, con­cerns the ben­e­fit of adju­vant chemother­apy, which gen­er­ally reduces the odds of recur­rence by about a third. So if you have a stage II tumor with good mol­e­c­u­lar fea­tures and the odds of recur­rence are some­where around 15 percent, that comes down to around 10 percent with the treat­ment, which does bear sig­nif­i­cant side effects and risks. Another fairly com­mon mis­un­der­stand­ing in oncol­ogy is in the area of Phase I clin­i­cal tri­als, in which the drugs are tested for toxic effects in humans, and to see how much peo­ple can with­stand, and not for ther­a­peu­tic effect.

This topic is wor­thy of lots more dis­cus­sion than I can afford here. I do rec­om­mend read­ing the full arti­cle, includ­ing the meth­ods about how the sur­vey was done, and the edi­to­r­ial* in the Annals, which accom­pa­nied the paper, which like so many other provoca­tive and sig­nif­i­cant reports in the med­ical lit­er­a­ture, didn’t get much atten­tion in the lay press.

One point the edi­to­r­ial con­sid­ers is that, per­haps, the PCI con­sent form used by the study authors and said to be at a 12th-grade read­ing level, should instead be pro­vided at an 8th-grade level, as some insti­tu­tions rec­om­mend and require. I’m not so sure about this, because I think a lot of med­ical ideas and deci­sions sim­ply can­not be com­mu­ni­cated at a lower level with­out loss of con­tent, i.e. nuanced information.

I’m eager for read­ers’ views on this: How often is it that doc­tors effec­tively con­vey why a pro­ce­dure should be done or a treat­ment be given, and what might be done to improve the process?

—–

*sub­scrip­tion required

*This blog post was originally published at Medical Lessons*


You may also like these posts

Read comments »


2 Responses to “Understanding Treatment: The Communication Disconnect Between Doctors And Patients”

  1. I suspect that we physicians tend to sanitize our speech when we are having informed consent discussions. When we believe that a procedures is the right choice, I suspect this affects how we package it to the patient. The converse is also true. Nice post, Elaine.

  2. Thanks, Michael. I agree – it happens both ways.

Return to article »

Latest Interviews

IDEA Labs: Medical Students Take The Lead In Healthcare Innovation

It’s no secret that doctors are disappointed with the way that the U.S. healthcare system is evolving. Most feel helpless about improving their work conditions or solving technical problems in patient care. Fortunately one young medical student was undeterred by the mountain of disappointment carried by his senior clinician mentors…

Read more »

How To Be A Successful Patient: Young Doctors Offer Some Advice

I am proud to be a part of the American Resident Project an initiative that promotes the writing of medical students residents and new physicians as they explore ideas for transforming American health care delivery. I recently had the opportunity to interview three of the writing fellows about how to…

Read more »

See all interviews »

Latest Cartoon

See all cartoons »

Latest Book Reviews

Book Review: Is Empathy Learned By Faking It Till It’s Real?

I m often asked to do book reviews on my blog and I rarely agree to them. This is because it takes me a long time to read a book and then if I don t enjoy it I figure the author would rather me remain silent than publish my…

Read more »

The Spirit Of The Place: Samuel Shem’s New Book May Depress You

When I was in medical school I read Samuel Shem s House Of God as a right of passage. At the time I found it to be a cynical yet eerily accurate portrayal of the underbelly of academic medicine. I gained comfort from its gallows humor and it made me…

Read more »

Eat To Save Your Life: Another Half-True Diet Book

I am hesitant to review diet books because they are so often a tangled mess of fact and fiction. Teasing out their truth from falsehood is about as exhausting as delousing a long-haired elementary school student. However after being approached by the authors’ PR agency with the promise of a…

Read more »

See all book reviews »