IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v28y2008i5p751-762.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Individualized Evidence-Based Decision Support on Aneurysm Patients' Decision Making, Ideals of Autonomy, and Quality of Life

Author

Listed:
  • Anne M. Stiggelbout

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands, A.M.Stiggelbout@lumc.nl)

  • Albert C. Molewijk

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands)

  • Wilma Otten

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands)

  • J. Hajo Van Bockel

    (Department of (Vascular) Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands)

  • Cornelis M. A. Bruijninckx

    (Department of Surgery, Leyenburg Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands)

  • Ilse Van der Salm

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands)

  • Job Kievit

    (Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, the Netherlands, Department of (Vascular) Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands)

Abstract

Background . A major challenge in surgery is the integration of evidence-based medicine and patient autonomy. The authors present a randomized trial studying the effect of an individualized evidence-based brochure (IB) on patients' autonomous behavior, patients' ideals of autonomy, and quality of life. Method . Patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aneurysm and their surgeon were randomized to receive a general brochure (GB) or an IB presenting survival information and a ranking of the treatment strategies. Before and after receiving the brochure, patients filled out questionnaires on their behavior during the consultation, ideals of patient autonomy, and quality of life. Surgeons answered a short checklist evaluating the consultation. Results . One hundred patients participated, 49 in the intervention, 51 in the control group. The IB group had a better understanding of important issues in the treatment decision, had prepared more questions, and was less satisfied with the duration of the consultation. Their impression that the surgeon perceived them more as a medical problem than a patient with a problem increased. They agreed less with the surgeon's advice and lost some of their belief in ``the doctor knows best.'' Beforehand, the IB group had a stronger preference for patient-based decisions, but afterward they displayed more surgeon-based decisions. No effects were seen on patients' quality of life. Conclusions . Individualized evidence-based information stimulated patients' active involvement but in the context of our study led to less patient-based decisions. Patient-made decisions and patient autonomy should, however, not be equated.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne M. Stiggelbout & Albert C. Molewijk & Wilma Otten & J. Hajo Van Bockel & Cornelis M. A. Bruijninckx & Ilse Van der Salm & Job Kievit, 2008. "The Impact of Individualized Evidence-Based Decision Support on Aneurysm Patients' Decision Making, Ideals of Autonomy, and Quality of Life," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(5), pages 751-762, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:5:p:751-762
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08321680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08321680
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08321680?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. Falkum, Erik & Førde, Reidun, 2001. "Paternalism, patient autonomy, and moral deliberation in the physician-patient relationship: Attitudes among Norwegian physicians," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 239-248, January.
    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. France Légaré & Stéphane Turcotte & Dawn Stacey & Stéphane Ratté & Jennifer Kryworuchko & Ian Graham, 2012. "Patients’ Perceptions of Sharing in Decisions," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Flynn, Kathryn E. & Smith, Maureen A. & Vanness, David, 2006. "A typology of preferences for participation in healthcare decision making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 1158-1169, September.

    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:28:y:2008:i:5:p:751-762. 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.