Scott E Regenbogen1, Christine M Veenstra2, Sarah T Hawley3, Samantha Hendren4, Kevin C Ward5, Ikuko Kato6, Arden M Morris7. 1. Center for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Electronic address: sregenbo@med.umich.edu. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3. Cancer Surveillance & Outcomes Research Team, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 4. Center for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Georgia Center for Cancer Statistics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. 6. Departments of Oncology and Pathology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI. 7. Center for Healthcare Outcomes & Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Cancer Surveillance & Outcomes Research Team, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Trust in physicians is an essential part of therapeutic relationships. Complications are common after colorectal cancer procedures, but little is known of their effect on patient-surgeon relationships. We hypothesized that unexpected complications impair trust and communication between patients and surgeons. METHODS: We performed a population-based survey of surgically diagnosed stage III colorectal cancer patients in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registries for Georgia and Metropolitan Detroit between August 2011 and October 2012. Using published survey instruments, we queried subjects about trust in and communication with their surgeon. The primary predictor was the occurrence of an operative complication. We examined patient factors associated with trust and communication then compared the relationship between operative complications and patient-reported trust and communication with their surgeons. RESULTS: Among 622 preliminary respondents (54% response rate), 25% experienced postoperative complications. Those with complications were less likely to report high trust (73% vs 81%, P = .04) and high-quality communication (80% vs 95%, P < .001). Complications reduced trust among only 4% of patient-surgeon dyads with high-quality communication, whereas complications diminished patients' trust in 50% with poorer communication (P < .001). After controlling for communication ratings, we found there was no residual effect of complications on trust (P = .96). CONCLUSION: Most respondents described trust in and communication with their surgeons as high. Complications were common and were associated with lower trust and poorer communication. However, the relationship between complications and trust was modified by communication. Trust remained high, even in the presence of complications, among respondents who reported high levels of patient-centered communication with their surgeons.
BACKGROUND: Trust in physicians is an essential part of therapeutic relationships. Complications are common after colorectal cancer procedures, but little is known of their effect on patient-surgeon relationships. We hypothesized that unexpected complications impair trust and communication between patients and surgeons. METHODS: We performed a population-based survey of surgically diagnosed stage III colorectal cancerpatients in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registries for Georgia and Metropolitan Detroit between August 2011 and October 2012. Using published survey instruments, we queried subjects about trust in and communication with their surgeon. The primary predictor was the occurrence of an operative complication. We examined patient factors associated with trust and communication then compared the relationship between operative complications and patient-reported trust and communication with their surgeons. RESULTS: Among 622 preliminary respondents (54% response rate), 25% experienced postoperative complications. Those with complications were less likely to report high trust (73% vs 81%, P = .04) and high-quality communication (80% vs 95%, P < .001). Complications reduced trust among only 4% of patient-surgeon dyads with high-quality communication, whereas complications diminished patients' trust in 50% with poorer communication (P < .001). After controlling for communication ratings, we found there was no residual effect of complications on trust (P = .96). CONCLUSION: Most respondents described trust in and communication with their surgeons as high. Complications were common and were associated with lower trust and poorer communication. However, the relationship between complications and trust was modified by communication. Trust remained high, even in the presence of complications, among respondents who reported high levels of patient-centered communication with their surgeons.
Authors: Marij A Hillen; Astrid T Onderwater; Myra C B van Zwieten; Hanneke C J M de Haes; Ellen M A Smets Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-01-30 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Rajiv Y Chandawarkar; Kimberly A Ruscher; Aleksandra Krajewski; Manish Garg; Carol Pfeiffer; Rekha Singh; Walter E Longo; Robert A Kozol; Beth Lesnikoski; Prakash Nadkarni Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2011-08
Authors: Arielle E Kanters; Arden M Morris; Paul H Abrahamse; Lona Mody; Pasithorn A Suwanabol Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Pasithorn A Suwanabol; Ari C Reichstein; Z Tuba Suzer-Gurtekin; Jane Forman; Maria J Silveira; Lona Mody; Arden M Morris Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Christine M Veenstra; Scott E Regenbogen; Sarah T Hawley; Jennifer J Griggs; Mousumi Banerjee; Ikuko Kato; Kevin C Ward; Arden M Morris Journal: Med Care Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Arden M Morris; Ardith Z Doorenbos; Emily Haozous; Alexa Meins; Sara Javid; David R Flum Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 3.894