IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v21y2001i2p141-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Risk and Benefit Perception in Informed Consent for Surgery

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Lloyd

    (Faculty of Medicine, Leicester University)

  • Paul Hayes

    (Faculty of Medicine, Leicester University)

  • Peter R. F. Bell

    (Faculty of Medicine, Leicester University)

  • A. Ross Naylor

    (Faculty of Medicine, Leicester University)

Abstract

Background . Informed consent relies on patients’ ability to understand risk information. Evidence suggests that people may extract the gist of any risk information to make medical decisions. Existing evidence also suggests that there is an inverse relationship between the perception of risk and the perception of benefit. Method . Seventy-one patients on the waiting list for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) were surveyed regarding their understanding and recall of the risk and benefit to health of undergoing CEA. Patients were surveyed 1 month after their initial consultation, and a subgroup was surveyed again on the day before their operation. Results . Patients’ estimates of their baseline risk of stroke without surgery were significantly different from what they had been told by the surgeon. Patients’ estimates of stroke risk due to surgery ranged from 0% to 65% (actual local risk 2%). Patients also had unreasonable expectations about the benefit of the operation for their health. Estimates of stroke risk correlated positively with the degree of expected benefit from the operation (r = 0.29, P = 0.05). When resurveyed the day before the operation, patients’ perceptions of both risk and benefit had increased significantly. The risk perception data from some patients appeared to contradict some of the predictions of the fuzzy-trace theory. Conclusions . Most patients failed to understand the risks and benefits associated with CEA. Some patients’ estimates of stroke risk were actually greater than the perceived potential benefit of surgery in terms of risk reduction. The data also suggested a positive correlation between the degree of perceived benefit and the degree of perceived risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Lloyd & Paul Hayes & Peter R. F. Bell & A. Ross Naylor, 2001. "The Role of Risk and Benefit Perception in Informed Consent for Surgery," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(2), pages 141-149, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:2:p:141-149
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100207
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0102100207?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1995. "Evaluating Health Risks," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521478786, September.
    2. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1995. "Evaluating Health Risks," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521472852, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ian G. J. Dawson & Johnnie E. V. Johnson & Michelle A. Luke, 2017. "One Too Many? Understanding the Influence of Risk Factor Quantity on Perceptions of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(6), pages 1157-1169, June.
    2. Lily N. Stalter & Nathan D. Baggett & Bret M. Hanlon & Anne Buffington & Elle L. Kalbfell & Amy B. Zelenski & Robert M. Arnold & Justin T. Clapp & Margaret L. Schwarze, 2023. "Identifying Patterns in Preoperative Communication about High-Risk Surgical Intervention: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(4), pages 487-497, May.
    3. Reynolds, William W. & Nelson, Robert M., 2007. "Risk perception and decision processes underlying informed consent to research participation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 2105-2115, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Clarke, Philip M., 1998. "Cost-benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 767-787, December.
    2. Blomquist, Glenn C. & Coomes, Paul A. & Jepsen, Christopher & Koford, Brandon C. & Troske, Kenneth R., 2014. "Estimating the social value of higher education: willingness to pay for community and technical colleges," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 3-41, January.
    3. Hugh Gravelle & Dave Smith, 2001. "Discounting for health effects in cost–benefit and cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 587-599, October.
    4. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    5. Richard D. Smith, 2007. "The role of 'reference goods' in contingent valuation: should we help respondents to 'construct' their willingness to pay?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(12), pages 1319-1332.
    6. Olivier Chanel & Pascale Scapecchi & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "How to correctly assess mortality benefits in public policies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 759-776.
    7. Bleichrodt, Han & Crainich, David & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 2003. "Comorbidities and the willingness to pay for health improvements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(11), pages 2399-2406, October.
    8. Gregory Ponthiere, 2008. "A Study of the Sensitivity of Longevity-adjusted Income Measures," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 339-361.
    9. Sadique, Z. & Edmunds, W. J. & Devlin, N. & Parkin, D., 2005. "Understanding individuals’ decisions about vaccination: a comparison between Expected Utility and Regret Theory models," Working Papers 05/03, Department of Economics, City University London.
    10. Don Kenkel, 2006. "WTP- and QALY-Based Approaches to Valuing Health for Policy: Common Ground and Disputed Territory," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(3), pages 419-437, July.
    11. O'Conor, Richard M. & Blomquist, Glenn C., 1997. "Measurement of consumer-patient preferences using a hybrid contingent valuation method," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 667-683, December.
    12. Rodgers Makwinja & Ishmael Bobby Mphangwe Kosamu & Chikumbusko Chiziwa Kaonga, 2019. "Determinants and Values of Willingness to Pay for Water Quality Improvement: Insights from Chia Lagoon, Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-26, August.
    13. Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Johannesson, Magnus, 1999. "New estimates of the demand for health: results based on a categorical health measure and Swedish micro data," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(10), pages 1325-1332, November.
    14. Johannesson, Magnus & Johansson, Per-Olov, 1997. "Quality of life and the WTP for an increased life expectancy at an advanced age," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 219-228, August.
    15. Karen Blumenschein & GlennC. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, January.
    16. Mark Harrison & Dan Rigby & Caroline Vass & Terry Flynn & Jordan Louviere & Katherine Payne, 2014. "Risk as an Attribute in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review of the Literature," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 151-170, June.
    17. Gregory Ponthiere, 2007. "Monetizing Longevity Gains under Welfare Interdependencies: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 449-469, September.
    18. Grégory Ponthière, 2004. "Incorporating changes in life expectancy into economic growth rates: an application to Belgium, 1867-1997," CREPP Working Papers 0403, Centre de Recherche en Economie Publique et de la Population (CREPP) (Research Center on Public and Population Economics) HEC-Management School, University of Liège.
    19. Glenn Blomquist & Karen Blumenschein & Magnus Johannesson, 2009. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay without Bias using Follow-up Certainty Statements: Comparisons between Probably/Definitely and a 10-point Certainty Scale," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 473-502, August.
    20. David K. Whynes & Jane L. Wolstenholme & Emma Frew, 2004. "Evidence of range bias in contingent valuation payment scales," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 183-190, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:2:p:141-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.