TY - JOUR
T1 - Information Communicated with Patients in Decision Making about their Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
AU - Knops, A. M.
AU - Ubbink, D. T.
AU - Legemate, D. A.
AU - de Haes, J. C. J. M.
AU - Goossens, A.
PY - 2010
Y1 - 2010
N2 - Objectives: To explore what kind of information surgeons communicate with patients diagnosed with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, and if the information provided regarding the disorder and treatment options available complies with legal requirements. Methods: Dutch vascular surgeons sound-recorded consultations with their patients. Recordings were scored using a checklist based on ethical considerations and five statutory categories of information on: (1) the disorder, (2) procedure and aim of surgery, (3) consequences and risks of surgery, (4) watchful observation and (5) individual prognosis regarding state of health. Each category was represented by several information items, which were scored dichotomously ('not mentioned' or 'mentioned'). A category was considered sufficiently addressed if at least one of its items was mentioned. Results: Thirty-five consultations were recorded (13 patients with aneurysmal diameter <5.5 cm and 22 with diameter >= 5.5 cm). In a minority of recordings, all five categories were addressed: 1/13 (8%) and 9/22 (41%), respectively. None of the information items was discussed consistently in every recording. Although most patients were informed about the proposed treatment option (11/13; 85% and 19/22; 86%), the alternative treatment option was mentioned only occasionally (4/13; 31% and 14/22; 64%). Conclusions: Patients with an abdominal aneurysm are informed inconsistently about their disorder and treatment options. Information is often less than that legally required. This may hinder shared decision making. (C) 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
AB - Objectives: To explore what kind of information surgeons communicate with patients diagnosed with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, and if the information provided regarding the disorder and treatment options available complies with legal requirements. Methods: Dutch vascular surgeons sound-recorded consultations with their patients. Recordings were scored using a checklist based on ethical considerations and five statutory categories of information on: (1) the disorder, (2) procedure and aim of surgery, (3) consequences and risks of surgery, (4) watchful observation and (5) individual prognosis regarding state of health. Each category was represented by several information items, which were scored dichotomously ('not mentioned' or 'mentioned'). A category was considered sufficiently addressed if at least one of its items was mentioned. Results: Thirty-five consultations were recorded (13 patients with aneurysmal diameter <5.5 cm and 22 with diameter >= 5.5 cm). In a minority of recordings, all five categories were addressed: 1/13 (8%) and 9/22 (41%), respectively. None of the information items was discussed consistently in every recording. Although most patients were informed about the proposed treatment option (11/13; 85% and 19/22; 86%), the alternative treatment option was mentioned only occasionally (4/13; 31% and 14/22; 64%). Conclusions: Patients with an abdominal aneurysm are informed inconsistently about their disorder and treatment options. Information is often less than that legally required. This may hinder shared decision making. (C) 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.02.012
DO - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.02.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 20347601
SN - 1078-5884
VL - 39
SP - 708
EP - 713
JO - European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
JF - European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
IS - 6
ER -