Literature DB >> 17264190

Doctor's views on disclosing or withholding information on low risks of complication.

G G Palmboom1, D L Willems, N B A T Janssen, J C J M de Haes.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: More and more quantitative information is becoming available about the risks of complications arising from medical treatment. In everyday practice, this raises the question whether each and every risk, however low, should be disclosed to patients. What could be good reasons for doing or not doing so? This will increasingly become a dilemma for practitioners.
OBJECTIVE: To report doctors' views on whether to disclose or withhold information on low risks of complications.
METHODS: In a qualitative study design, 37 respondents (gastroenterologists and gynaecologists or obstetricians) were included. Focus group interviews were held with 22 respondents and individual in-depth interviews with 15.
RESULTS: Doctors have doubts about disclosing or withholding information on complication risk, especially in a risk range of 1 in 200 to 1 in 10,000. Their considerations on whether to disclose or to withhold information depend on a complicated mix of patient and doctor-associated reasons; on medical and personal considerations; and on the kind and purpose of intervention. DISCUSSION: Even though the degree of a risk is important in a doctor's considerations, the severity of the possible complications and patients' wishes and competencies have an important role as well. Respondents said that low risks should always be communicated when there are alternatives for the intervention or when the patient may prevent or mitigate the risk. When the appropriateness of disclosing risks is doubtful, doctors should always tell their patients that no intervention is without risk, give them the opportunity to gather all the information they need or want, and enable them to detect a complication at an early stage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17264190      PMCID: PMC2598232          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.014936

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  7 in total

1.  Patients' and doctors' attitudes to amount of information given after unintended injury during treatment: cross sectional, questionnaire survey.

Authors:  M Hingorani; T Wong; G Vafidis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-03-06

2.  Reducing legal risk by practicing patient-centered medicine.

Authors:  Heidi P Forster; Jack Schwartz; Evan DeRenzo
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2002-06-10

3.  Colonoscopic perforations.

Authors:  F Y Araghizadeh; A E Timmcke; F G Opelka; T C Hicks; D E Beck
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  The risk epidemic in medical journals.

Authors:  J A Skolbekken
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 5.  The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments.

Authors:  A J Lloyd
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-09

Review 6.  Colonoscopic perforations. Etiology, diagnosis, and management.

Authors:  L J Damore; P C Rantis; A M Vernava; W E Longo
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Colonoscopic perforations: incidence, management, and outcomes.

Authors:  William S Cobb; B Todd Heniford; Lee B Sigmon; Reem Hasan; Connie Simms; Kent W Kercher; Brent D Matthews
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 0.688

  7 in total
  4 in total

1.  Potential chemotherapy side effects: what do oncologists tell parents?

Authors:  Lisa Ysela Ramirez; Samantha E Huestis; Tsiao Yi Yap; Stephen Zyzanski; Dennis Drotar; Eric Kodish
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  The evolution of uncertainty in second opinions about prostate cancer treatment.

Authors:  Marij A Hillen; Caitlin M Gutheil; Ellen M A Smets; Moritz Hansen; Terrence M Kungel; Tania D Strout; Paul K J Han
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  How do healthcare professionals respond to ethical challenges regarding information management? A review of empirical studies.

Authors:  Cornelius Ewuoso; Susan Hall; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Glob Bioeth       Date:  2021-04-05

4.  How psychotherapists handle treatment errors -- an ethical analysis.

Authors:  Irina Medau; Ralf J Jox; Stella Reiter-Theil
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 2.652

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.