Parent resistance to physicians' treatment recommendations: one resource for initiating a negotiation of the treatment decision

This article examines pediatrician-parent interaction in the context of acute pediatric encounters for children with upper respiratory infections. Parents and physicians orient to treatment recommendations as normatively requiring parent acceptance for physicians to close the activity. Through acceptance, withholding of acceptance, or active resistance, parents have resources with which to negotiate for a treatment outcome that is in line with their own wants. This article offers evidence that even in acute care, shared decision making not only occurs but, through normative constraints, is mandated for parents and physicians to reach accord in the treatment decision.     

The role of physicians' recommendations in medical treatment decisions.

BACKGROUND: A shift away from the medical paternalism of the past has occurred, and today, the law and ethics advocate that physicians share decision-making responsibility with their patients. It is unclear, however, what the appropriate role of physicians' recommendations ought to be in this new shared decision-making paradigm. One way to approach this question is to assess the influence of physicians' recommendations. OBJECTIVE: In this study, the authors examine the influence of physicians' recommendations on hypothetical treatment decisions. Do physicians' recommendations influence treatment decisions in scenarios where the decision that maximizes health is obvious and apparent to subjects? Do recommendations pull subjects away from the treatment choice that they otherwise prefer (based on their decision when unaware of the physicians' recommendation)? DESIGN: An experimental web questionnaire presented hypothetical medical treatment scenarios in which the treatment choice that maximized health was obvious. Across scenarios, the authors varied physicians' recommendations in 3 ways: (1) physicians' recommendations supporting what maximized health, (2) physicians' recommendations that went against what maximized health, and (3) no physicians' recommendation. The participants were 102 volunteers. RESULTS: Hypothetical treatment decisions were significantly influenced by physicians'recommendations (P < 0.0001), and physicians'recommendations against the decision that maximized health pulled subjects away from the treatment decision that they made when no recommendation was given (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Physicians' recommendations can lead people to make decisions that go against what is best and against what they would otherwise prefer. Physicians must take care in making recommendations and should incorporate patient preferences into their recommendations.     

Mothers' compliance with physicians' recommendations on infant feeding.

One hundred thirty-one mothers who were patients of ten physicians were surveyed to determine their compliance with physician-recommended infant feeding practices. For a direct, self-reported measure, the rate of non-compliance was nearly 30 per cent. A second measure, a "compliance score," was computed by comparing mothers' responses to specific questions about the feeding of their babies with their physcians' recommendations for normal, healthy infants. The mean noncompliance rate on this measure was 44 per cent. Differing response patterns regarding specific feeding practices were found for breast-feeding and bottle feeding mothers. To determine selected psychologic factors associated with compliance, health-related attitude and belief scales were originated and validated. Attitudes that "nutrition is important" and a "concern for health" were significantly correlated with the compliance score for breast-feeding mothers.     

Structuring healthcare advance directives: Evidence from Chinese end-of-life cancer patients' treatment preferences

Background

Patients' treatment decisions may be influenced by the ways in which treatment options are presented. There is little evidence on how patients with advanced cancer choose preferences for advance directives (ADs) in China. Informed by behavioural economics, we assess whether end-of-life (EOL) cancer patients held deep-seated preferences for their health care and whether default options and order effects influenced their decision-making.

Methods

We collected data on 179 advanced cancer patients who were randomly assigned to complete one of the four types of ADs: comfort-oriented care (CC) AD (comfort default AD); a life extension (LE)-oriented care option (LE default AD); CC (standard CC AD) and LE-oriented (standard LE AD). Analysis of variance test was used.

Results

In terms of the general goal of care, 32.6% of patients in the comfort default AD group retained the comfort-oriented choice, twice as many as in the standard CC group without default options. Order effect was significant in only two individual-specific palliative care choices. Most patients (65.9%) appointed their children to make EOL care decisions, but patients choosing the CC goal were twice as likely to ask their family members to adhere to their choices than patients who chose the LE goal.

Conclusion

Patients with advanced cancer did not hold deep-seated preferences for EOL care. Default options shaped decisions between CC and LE-oriented care. Order effect only shaped decisions in some specific treatment targets. The structure of ADs matters and influence different treatment outcomes, including the role of palliative care.

Patient or Public Contribution

Between August and November 2018, from 640 cancer hospital medical records fitting the selection criteria at a 3A level hospital in Shandong Province, we randomly selected 188 terminal EOL advanced cancer patients using a random generator programme to ensure all eligible patients had an equal chance of selection. Each respondent completes one of the four AD surveys. While respondents might require support in making their healthcare choices, they were informed about the purpose of our research study, and that their survey choices would not affect their actual treatment plan. Patients who did not agree to participate were not surveyed.     

The structure of patients' presenting concerns: physicians' opening questions

This article uses conversation analysis to develop a typology of questions that physicians use to solicit patients' problems and then tests question-format effects on patients' subsequent problem presentations. Data are videotapes of 302 primary-, acute-, and outpatient-care visits involving 77 physicians in 41 urban and rural clinics, as well as pre- and post-visit questionnaires. The most frequent question formats were general inquiries (62%; e.g., "What can I do for you today?") and requests for confirmation (27%; e.g., "I understand you're having some sinus problems today?"). Compared to confirmatory questions, general inquiries were associated with significantly longer problem presentations ( p<.0001) that included more discrete symptoms ( p<.0001). Physicians were more likely to use confirmatory questions in the urban setting ( p=.003).     

The medical practice of patient autonomy and cancer treatment refusals: a patients' and physicians' perspective

The idea that patients should take up an autonomous position in the decision-making process is generally appreciated. However, what patient autonomy means in the case of patients who refuse a recommended oncological treatment has not been investigated. This study aims to clarify how the concept of patient autonomy can be applied to patients who refuse a recommended oncological treatment. Focus questions are: (1) what is meant by patient autonomy, i.e. how is this autonomy conceptualised and (2) which factors influence patient autonomy. A qualitative study design with in-depth interviews was performed. The study sample included 30 cancer patients and 16 physicians. All patients had refused a recommended oncological treatment. Patient autonomy was revealed to be a comprehensive concept with elaborations on 'making decisions' and 'defining life choices' as sub-concepts of patient autonomy. In contrast to what is generally believed, decisions of patients to refuse an oncological treatment do not so much rely on the medical information about disease and treatment options, but are rather inspired by patients' own experiences or those of close others. The medical information and the role of the physician do, however, influence patients' experiences of being free and/or of having a choice. The results show that the extent of pressure physicians will exert to persuade the patient to be treated as recommended depends on the medical distinction between a curative and a non-curative treatment goal. It seems that there exists a shift in respecting patient autonomy, which depends on factors like treatment goal. Discussing the respect shift may serve to clarify underlying thoughts and principles in the decision-making process for both physicians and patients.     

Sex of physician: patients' preferences and stereotypes

Patients' preferences for physicians of a particular sex tend to skew sex distributions of clinical populations in training and practice settings. A study was developed to explore these preferences and potential reasons for them. Of 185 adult patients surveyed at four family practice residency clinics, 45% expressed a preference for sex of physician; 43% of women and 12% of men preferred a female physician, while 31% of men and 9% of women preferred a male physician. Patients who stated no overall preference often expressed one in specific clinical situations, eg, anal or genital examinations. Patients who preferred female physicians reported humane behaviors as more characteristic of female physicians, and those who preferred male physicians reported humane behaviors as more characteristic of men; patients who had no overall sex preference did not sex stereotype physicians on these behaviors (F = 59.34, P less than .01). Patients who preferred male physicians reported technical competence behaviors as more characteristic of male physicians; others did not sex stereotype physicians on these behaviors (F = 15.4, P less than .01). Patients rated humaneness and comprehensiveness as being of high priority, but no relationship was found between priorities for aspects of care and preferences for sex of physician. Areas for future investigation include assessing preferences in other populations and exploring sex differences in physician behavior during office encounters and correlating these differences with patient satisfaction.     

Osteoporosis management: physicians' recommendations and womens' compliance following osteoporosis testing.

Physicians use several pharmaceutical agents (e.g., hormone replacement therapy [HRT], calcitonin, bisphosphonates, calcium, and vitamin D) to manage osteoporosis. However, relatively little research has examined how physicians employ these agents in osteoporosis management. Additionally, researchers have not examined compliance with these treatments following the measurement of bone mass. Using a mail survey, we examined physicians' recommendation of, and women's compliance with, osteoporosis treatment modalities (stratified by fracture risk at the femoral neck and age) following bone mass measurement. We found that physicians recommended non-HRT treatment more often than HRT treatment to women with an increased risk of fracture, and women's acceptance of recommended treatments was relatively high following the measurement of bone mass.     

Oncologist preferences for health states associated with the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer

Background

For advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, oncologists are faced with multiple treatment options that differ in terms of possible clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Objective

To explore oncologists’ preferences for hypothetical outcome scenarios (i.e. health states) resulting from various treatment options.

Methods

Six hypothetical health states reflecting varying levels of toxicity, treatment efficacy and emotional well-being were developed representing advanced ovarian cancer treatment. During face-to-face interviews, oncologists provided their relative preferences for these health states using a visual analogue scale and Standard Gamble exercise.

Results

The 34 participating oncologists consistently preferred health states reflecting high treatment efficacy over low efficacy for patients with newly diagnosed disease, regardless of toxicity or emotional well-being. In the setting of recurrent disease, physicians preferred a heath state only if it reflected both high efficacy and positive emotional well-being.

Conclusions

These data suggest that oncologists may choose treatments that maximize clinical efficacy only when not associated with severe toxicities or low emotional well-being unless associated with a large improvement in efficacy. Physicians may prefer a more toxic chemotherapy regimen that improves survival, and are more willing to compromise emotional well-being for a large survival advantage in the setting of newly diagnosed disease. Slight improvements in clinical efficacy may not be acceptable to oncologists unless associated with higher emotional well-being for the patient.