Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study

Abstract Background There is a growing patient interest in being involved in the decision-making process. However, little information is provided on how this information should be structured. Does it make a difference, in patient treatment decision-making, whether information is given based on the b...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Carlos Torrens, Joan Miquel, Fernando Santana
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-04-01
Series:Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13018-019-1157-2
id doaj-6c0c074f1d694502950e660e4e66fbfb
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6c0c074f1d694502950e660e4e66fbfb2020-11-25T02:19:14ZengBMCJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research1749-799X2019-04-011411610.1186/s13018-019-1157-2Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized studyCarlos Torrens0Joan Miquel1Fernando Santana2Department of Orthopedics, Hospital del MarDepartment of Orthopedics, Hospital d’Igualada, Consorci Sanitari l’AnoiaDepartment of Orthopedics, Hospital del MarAbstract Background There is a growing patient interest in being involved in the decision-making process. However, little information is provided on how this information should be structured. Does it make a difference, in patient treatment decision-making, whether information is given based on the benefits or on the side effects in rotator cuff disorders? Methods It is a prospective randomized study that includes patients diagnosed with rotator cuff tears. Patients were randomly allocated to either group A (benefit-inform) or group B (side effect-inform) and were asked to answer the following questions based on their assigned group: Group A: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and states that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff remains healed at the 2-year follow-up in 71% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Group B: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff is torn again at 2-year follow-up in 29% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Age, gender, the shoulder affected and the functional status assessed through the Constant score were also recorded. Results 80 patients were randomized (43 to group A and 37 to group B). The patients assigned to group A (benefit) accepted surgery significantly more frequently than those assigned to group B (complication) (P = 0.000). In group A, 36 of 43 (84%) accepted surgery, compared to 17 of 37 (46%) in group B. Conclusions The way that information on rotator cuff disorders is provided strongly influences patients’ treatment decisions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03205852. Registered 29 June 2017. Retrospectively registered.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13018-019-1157-2Patient participationShared decision-makingOutcomesRotator cuffRotator cuff-repair
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Carlos Torrens
Joan Miquel
Fernando Santana
spellingShingle Carlos Torrens
Joan Miquel
Fernando Santana
Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Patient participation
Shared decision-making
Outcomes
Rotator cuff
Rotator cuff-repair
author_facet Carlos Torrens
Joan Miquel
Fernando Santana
author_sort Carlos Torrens
title Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
title_short Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
title_full Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
title_fullStr Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
title_full_unstemmed Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study
title_sort do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? a prospective randomized study
publisher BMC
series Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
issn 1749-799X
publishDate 2019-04-01
description Abstract Background There is a growing patient interest in being involved in the decision-making process. However, little information is provided on how this information should be structured. Does it make a difference, in patient treatment decision-making, whether information is given based on the benefits or on the side effects in rotator cuff disorders? Methods It is a prospective randomized study that includes patients diagnosed with rotator cuff tears. Patients were randomly allocated to either group A (benefit-inform) or group B (side effect-inform) and were asked to answer the following questions based on their assigned group: Group A: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and states that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff remains healed at the 2-year follow-up in 71% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Group B: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff is torn again at 2-year follow-up in 29% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Age, gender, the shoulder affected and the functional status assessed through the Constant score were also recorded. Results 80 patients were randomized (43 to group A and 37 to group B). The patients assigned to group A (benefit) accepted surgery significantly more frequently than those assigned to group B (complication) (P = 0.000). In group A, 36 of 43 (84%) accepted surgery, compared to 17 of 37 (46%) in group B. Conclusions The way that information on rotator cuff disorders is provided strongly influences patients’ treatment decisions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03205852. Registered 29 June 2017. Retrospectively registered.
topic Patient participation
Shared decision-making
Outcomes
Rotator cuff
Rotator cuff-repair
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13018-019-1157-2
work_keys_str_mv AT carlostorrens dowereallyallowpatientdecisionmakinginrotatorcuffsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT joanmiquel dowereallyallowpatientdecisionmakinginrotatorcuffsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedstudy
AT fernandosantana dowereallyallowpatientdecisionmakinginrotatorcuffsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedstudy
_version_ 1724877454967832576