D Misselbrook1, D Armstrong. 1. Department of General Practice, Guy's, King's and St Thomas's School of Medicine, London.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The medical profession is often presented with information on the value of treatment in terms of likely risk reduction. If this same information was presented to patients--so enabling them to give proper informed consent--would this affect their decision to be treated? AIM: To examine patients' choice about treatment in response to different forms of risk presentation. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal questionnaire study. SETTING: The questionnaire was sent to 102 hypertensive patients and 207 matched non-hypertensive patients aged between 35 and 65 years in a UK general practice. METHODS: Patients were asked the likelihood, on a four-point scale, of their accepting treatment for a chronic condition (mild hypertension) on the basis of relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction, number needed to treat, and personal probability of benefit. RESULTS: An 89% response rate was obtained. Of these, 92% would accept treatment using a relative risk reduction model, 75% would accept treatment using an absolute risk reduction model, 68% would accept treatment using a number needed to treat model, and 44% would accept treatment with a personal probability of benefit model. CONCLUSION: Many patients may prefer not to take treatment for mild hypertension if the risks were fully explained. However, given that the form of the explanation has a strong influence on the patient's decision, it is not clear how decision-making can be fully shared nor what should constitute informed consent to treatment in this situation.
BACKGROUND: The medical profession is often presented with information on the value of treatment in terms of likely risk reduction. If this same information was presented to patients--so enabling them to give proper informed consent--would this affect their decision to be treated? AIM: To examine patients' choice about treatment in response to different forms of risk presentation. DESIGN OF STUDY: Postal questionnaire study. SETTING: The questionnaire was sent to 102 hypertensivepatients and 207 matched non-hypertensivepatients aged between 35 and 65 years in a UK general practice. METHODS:Patients were asked the likelihood, on a four-point scale, of their accepting treatment for a chronic condition (mild hypertension) on the basis of relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction, number needed to treat, and personal probability of benefit. RESULTS: An 89% response rate was obtained. Of these, 92% would accept treatment using a relative risk reduction model, 75% would accept treatment using an absolute risk reduction model, 68% would accept treatment using a number needed to treat model, and 44% would accept treatment with a personal probability of benefit model. CONCLUSION: Many patients may prefer not to take treatment for mild hypertension if the risks were fully explained. However, given that the form of the explanation has a strong influence on the patient's decision, it is not clear how decision-making can be fully shared nor what should constitute informed consent to treatment in this situation.
Authors: A G Shaper; S J Pocock; M Walker; A N Phillips; T P Whitehead; P W Macfarlane Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 1985-09 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Cheryl L L Carling; Doris Tove Kristoffersen; Andrew D Oxman; Signe Flottorp; Atle Fretheim; Holger J Schünemann; Elie A Akl; Jeph Herrin; Thomas D MacKenzie; Victor M Montori Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240