Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11533434›Full record

ArticleQuality in health care : QHC2001

Suffering in deference: a focus group study of older cardiac patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk.

C Kennelly, A Bowling

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality in health care : QHC, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Ageism directed to older adults in health services: A scoping review.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2023
    Article
  2. Participation of very old adults in health care decisions.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2014
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Practical issues around putting the patient at the centre of care.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2003
    Review
  9. What do patients want from high-quality general practice and how do we involve them in improvement?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

C KennellyCollege of Health, St Margaret's House, London E2 9PL, UK. info@tcoh.demon.co.uk
A Bowling

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore older people's experiences of health care in relation to their medical condition (ischaemic heart disease), their understanding of health risks, treatment preferences, and the impact of different treatments on their quality of life.

designQualitative study based on five focus groups.

settingFive local heart support groups across London.

participants38 patients aged 56 and over who were members of local heart support groups, diagnosed with ischaemic heart disease.

main outcome measureAnalysis of patients' narratives to identify key themes and issues using the framework method of qualitative data analysis.

resultsCardiac patients would prefer to follow the cardiologist's recommendation for treatment, based on their medical expertise. If offered a choice, many said they would prefer to take medication, at least initially, as they would rather not undergo surgery. However, they accepted that, depending on their medical condition, they might not have a choice. Other factors that participants said affected their choice of treatments included their state of health, treatment outcomes, families' feelings, their age, and the previous number of operations they had undergone. They found it difficult to discuss risk in terms of numbers; most felt that a 3% risk of death from surgery was low. Instead, they discussed risk in terms of likelihood of treatment restoring quality of life. Patients expressed the fear that medication was not a cure and that surgical revascularisation is a traumatic experience that does not necessarily last forever. Participants felt that they needed further information on the impact of surgery and medication to make a more informed choice. Other barriers they felt they had faced in being treated were problems in accessing cardiologists and age discrimination.

conclusionIt was apparent from these focus groups that few patients were involved in medical decision making about their treatment. Most preferred the doctor to make the decision and did want to be involved. Despite their experiences as cardiac patients, they required much more information about treatment options for their condition before being able to make informed choices, where appropriate. Improved access to specialist care (cardiologists) and equal treatment by age are also required before patients' preferences can be elicited in practice.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision MakingPhysician-Patient RelationsRisk AssessmentAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInformed ConsentMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaPatient ParticipationPatient SatisfactionUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID11533434
PMCPMC1765735
OpenAlexW2100566027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.