Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25957212›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2015

Do Surgeons Treat Their Patients Like They Would Treat Themselves?

Stein J Janssen, Teun Teunis, Thierry G Guitton, David Ring, Science of Variation Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Authorship Proliferation of Research Articles in Top 10 Orthopaedic Journals: A 70-Year Analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Variation in Treatment for Trapeziometacarpal Arthrosis.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Stein J JanssenDepartment of Hand Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Yawkey Center, Suite 2100, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Teun TeunisDepartment of Hand Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Yawkey Center, Suite 2100, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Thierry G GuittonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
David RingDepartment of Hand Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Yawkey Center, Suite 2100, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. dring@partners.org.
Science of Variation Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is substantial unexplained geographical and surgeon-to-surgeon variation in rates of surgery. One would expect surgeons to treat patients and themselves similarly based on best evidence and accounting for patient preferences. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Are surgeons more likely to recommend surgery when choosing for a patient than for themselves? (2) Are surgeons less confident in deciding for patients than for themselves?

methodsTwo hundred fifty-four (32%) of 790 Science of Variation Group (SOVG) members reviewed 21 fictional upper extremity cases (eg, distal radius fracture, De Quervain tendinopathy) for which surgery is optional answering two questions: (1) What treatment would you choose/recommend: operative or nonoperative? (2) On a scale from 0 to 10, how confident are you about this decision? Confidence is the degree that one believes that his or her decision is the right one (ie, most appropriate). Participants were orthopaedic, trauma, and plastic surgeons, all with an interest in treating upper extremity conditions. Half of the participants were randomized to choose for themselves if they had this injury or illness. The other half was randomized to make treatment recommendations for a patient of their age and gender. For the choice of operative or nonoperative, the overall recommendation for treatment was expressed as a surgery score per surgeon by dividing the number of cases they would operate on by the total number of cases (n = 21), where 100% is when every surgeon recommended surgery for every case. For confidence, we calculated the mean confidence for all 21 cases per surgeon; overall score ranges from 0 to 10 with a higher score indicating more confidence in the decision for treatment.

resultsSurgeons were more likely to recommend surgery for a patient (44.2% ± 14.0%) than they were to choose surgery for themselves (38.5% ± 15.4%) with a mean difference of 6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1%-9.4%; p = 0.002). Surgeons were more confident in deciding for themselves than they were for a patient of similar age and gender (self: 7.9 ± 1.0, patient: 7.5 ± 1.2, mean difference: 0.35 [CI, 0.075-0.62], p = 0.012).

conclusionsSurgeons are slightly more likely to recommend surgery for a patient than they are to choose surgery for themselves and they choose for themselves with a little more confidence. Different perspectives, preferences, circumstantial information, and cognitive biases might explain the observed differences. This emphasizes the importance of (1) understanding patients' preferences and their considerations for treatment; (2) being aware that surgeons and patients might weigh various factors differently; (3) giving patients more autonomy by letting them balance risks and benefits themselves (ie, shared decision-making); and (4) assessing how dispassionate evidence-based decision aids help inform the patient and influences their decisional conflict. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeOrthopedic ProceduresPhysician-Patient RelationsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Choice BehaviorClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Care SurveysHumansMalePatient SelectionRandom AllocationRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID25957212
PMCPMC4586191

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.