ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2015
Do Surgeons Treat Their Patients Like They Would Treat Themselves?
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Evidence: Psychological and Institutional Factors Shaping Patent Ductus Arteriosus Stent Adoption.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Review
- The role of patient and surgeon characteristics on the treatment decision for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in athletes: a global survey.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- The personality factor in premium IOLs selection: quantifying Myers-Briggs personality types influence among cataract surgeons.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Upper Extremity Surgeon Recommendations for Imaging Do Not Correspond with Imaging Appropriateness Guidelines.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2024Article
- Heavy as a rock or light as dust: a comparison between the perceived workload for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Central European journal of urology · 2024Article
- Time for a paradigm shift in shared decision-making in trauma and emergency surgery? Results from an international survey.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Article
- Article
- Ethical issues with geographical variations in the provision of health care services.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Treatment of acute distal biceps tendon ruptures - A survey of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society surgical membership.Shoulder & elbow · 2022Article
- Surgeon Personal Factors Associated with Care Strategies in Musculoskeletal Telehealth.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- When is it considered reasonable to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment in critically ill patients? A random sample online questionnaire study.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- 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 · 2021Article
- Factors Associated with a Recommendation for Operative Treatment for Fracture of the Distal Radius.Journal of wrist surgery · 2021Article
- Variation in Treatment for Trapeziometacarpal Arthrosis.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2021Article
- Functional and radiological outcome of distal radius fractures stabilized by volar-locking plate with a minimum follow-up of 1 year.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2020Article
- Which intraocular lens would ophthalmologists choose for themselves?Eye (London, England) · 2019Article
- Do Patient Preferences Influence Surgeon Recommendations for Treatment?The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2019Article
- Exploring How Accountability Affects the Medical Decisions We Make for Other People.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Substantial variation among hernia experts in the decision for treatment of patients with incisional hernia: a descriptive study on agreement.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.