nach oben

European Spine Journal

Erschienen in:

01.04.2014 | Original Article

Patient involvement in surgical treatment decisions and satisfaction with the treatment results after lumbar intervertebral discectomy

verfasst von: Tõnu Rätsep, Andreas Abel, Ülla Linnamägi

Erschienen in: European Spine Journal | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate involvement of patients in surgical treatment decision making (STDM) in relations to satisfaction with the results of lumbar discectomy.

Methods

We evaluated prospectively 150 surgically treated patients with radicular pain due to lumbar disc herniation (LDH). The patients completed self-reported questionnaires about preferences for involvement and actual involvement in STDM. Global satisfaction with the results of the treatment was assessed at 1 year after the operation.

Results

Most of the patients (129 patients, 86 %) stated that they had been sufficiently informed about LDH to be involved in the treatment decisions, almost half of the patients (47 %) preferred active or collaborative involvement and 58 % of the patients reported higher actual involvement in STDM. Congruence between preferred and actual roles in decision making was 64 %. Most of the patients (77 %) were satisfied with the results of the operation, but satisfaction was not associated with involvement of patients in STDM.

Conclusion

A significant proportion of patients with LDH prefer to be actively involved in treatment decisions and experience an STDM process that matches their preferences for participation. However, individual differences in preferences for involvement in STDM are common and global satisfaction with the treatment results is not significantly related to the activity of involvement in STDM.

Brekke M, Hjortdahl P, Kvien TK (2001) Involvement and satisfaction: a Norwegian study of health care among 1,024 patients with rheumatoid arthritis and 1,509 patients with chronic noninflammatory musculoskeletal pain. Arthritis Rheum 45:8–15PubMedCrossRef

Kjeken I, Dagfinrud H, Mowinckel P, Uhlig T, Kvien TK, Finset A (2006) Rheumatology care: involvement in medical decisions, received information, satisfaction with care, and unmet health care needs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 55:394–401PubMedCrossRef

Andersen MR, Bowen DJ, Morea J, Stein KD, Baker F (2009) Involvement in decision-making and breast cancer survivor quality of life. Health Psychol 28:29–37PubMedCrossRef

Lee YY, Lin JL (2010) Do patient autonomy preferences matter? Linking patient-centered care to patient–physician relationships and health outcomes. Soc Sci Med 71:1811–1818PubMedCrossRef

Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA (2005) Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med 20:531–535PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Keating NL, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Borbas C, Weeks JC (2002) Treatment decision making in early-stage breast cancer: should surgeons match patients’ desired level of involvement? J Clin Oncol 20:1473–1479PubMedCrossRef

Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, Schwartz K, Liu L, Lakhani I, Salem B, Katz SJ (2005) Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer. Health Serv Res 40:745–767PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Hubbard G, Kidd L, Donaghy E (2008) Preferences for involvement in treatment decision making of patients with cancer: a review of the literature. Eur J Oncol Nurs 12:299–318PubMedCrossRef

Vogel BA, Leonhart R, Helmes AW (2009) Communication matters: the impact of communication and participation in decision making on breast cancer patients’ depression and quality of life. Patient Educ Couns 77:391–397PubMedCrossRef

10.

Slover J, Shue J, Koenig K (2012) Shared decision-making in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:1046–1053PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

11.

Weber H (1983) Lumbar disc herniation. A controlled, prospective study with ten years of observation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 8:131–140CrossRef

12.

Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Hanscom B, Skinner JS, Abdu WA, Hilibrand AS, Boden SD, Deyo RA (2006) Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine patient outcomes research trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA 296:2441–2450PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

de Boer D, Delnoij D, Rademakers J (2013) The importance of patient-centered care for various patient groups. Patient Educ Couns 90:405–410PubMedCrossRef

14.

Degner LF, Sloan JA (1992) Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play? J Clin Epidemiol 45:941–950PubMedCrossRef

15.

Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273PubMed

16.

Baron-Epel O, Kaplan G (2001) General subjective health status or age-related subjective health status: does it make a difference? Soc Sci Med 53:1373–1381PubMedCrossRef

17.

Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P (1997) The control preferences scale. Can J Nurs Res 29:21–43PubMed

18.

Chapple H, Shah S, Caress AL, Kay EJ (2003) Exploring dental patients’ preferred roles in treatment decision-making—a novel approach. Br Dent J 194:323–327CrossRef

19.

Heesen C, Kasper J, Segal J, Kopke S, Muhlhauser I (2004) Decisional role preferences, risk knowledge and information interests in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 10:643–650PubMedCrossRef

20.

Stewart DE, Abbey SE, Shnek ZM, Irvine J, Grace SL (2004) Gender differences in health information needs and decisional preferences in patients recovering from an acute ischemic coronary event. Psychosom Med 66:42–48PubMedCrossRef

21.

Chewning B, Bylund CL, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G (2012) Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 86:9–18PubMedCrossRef

22.

Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Weinstein J, Howe J, Ciol M, Mulley AG Jr (2000) Involving patients in clinical decisions: impact of an interactive video program on use of back surgery. Med Care 38:959–969PubMedCrossRef

23.

Phelan EA, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Weinstein JN, Ciol MA, Kreuter W, Howe JF (2001) Helping patients decide about back surgery: a randomized trial of an interactive video program. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:206–211CrossRef

24.

Barrett PH, Beck A, Schmid K, Fireman B, Brown JB (2002) Treatment decisions about lumbar herniated disk in a shared decision-making program. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 28:211–219PubMed

25.

Lurie JD, Spratt KF, Blood EA, Tosteson TD, Tosteson AN, Weinstein JN (2011) Effects of viewing an evidence-based video decision aid on patients’ treatment preferences for spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:1501–1504CrossRef

26.

Sepucha KR, Feibelmann S, Abdu WA, Clay CF, Cosenza C, Kearing S, Levin CA, Atlas SJ (2012) Psychometric evaluation of a decision quality instrument for treatment of lumbar herniated disc. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:1609–1616CrossRef

27.

Say R, Murtagh M, Thomson R (2006) Patients’ preference for involvement in medical decision making: a narrative review. Patient Educ Couns 60:102–114PubMedCrossRef

28.

Tariman JD, Berry DL, Cochrane B, Doorenbos A, Schepp K (2010) Preferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 21:1145–1151PubMedCrossRef

29.

Lerman CE, Brody DS, Caputo GC, Smith DG, Lazaro CG, Wolfson HG (1990) Patients’ perceived involvement in care scale: relationship to attitudes about illness and medical care. J Gen Intern Med 5:29–33PubMedCrossRef

30.

Pipe TB, Conner K, Dansky K, Schraeder C, Caruso E (2005) Perceived involvement in decision-making as a predictor of decision satisfaction in older adults. SOJNR 6:2–13

31.

Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH (2001) Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med 52:1865–1878PubMedCrossRef

32.

Smith A, Juraskova I, Butow P, Miguel C, Lopez AL, Chang S, Brown R, Bernhard J (2011) Sharing vs. caring—the relative impact of sharing decisions versus managing emotions on patient outcomes. Patient Educ Couns 82:233–239PubMedCrossRef

33.

McCaffery K, Irwig L, Bossuyt P (2007) Patient decision aids to support clinical decision making: evaluating the decision or the outcomes of the decision. Med Decis Making 27:619–625PubMedCrossRef

34.

Rönnberg K, Lind B, Zoëga B, Halldin K, Gellerstedt M, Brisby H (2007) Patients’ satisfaction with provided care/information and expectations on clinical outcome after lumbar disc herniation surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:256–261CrossRef

35.

Strömqvist F, Ahmad M, Hildingsson C, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B (2008) Gender differences in lumbar disc herniation surgery. Acta Orthop 79:643–649PubMedCrossRef

36.

Silverplats K, Lind B, Zoëga B, Halldin K, Rutberg L, Gellerstedt M, Brisby H (2010) Clinical factors of importance for outcome after lumbar disc herniation surgery: long-term follow-up. Eur Spine J 19:1459–1467PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Titel: Patient involvement in surgical treatment decisions and satisfaction with the treatment results after lumbar intervertebral discectomy
verfasst von: Tõnu Rätsep
Andreas Abel
Ülla Linnamägi
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2014
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Spine Journal / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3104-y

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen.
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Proximale Humerusfraktur: Auch 100-Jährige operieren?

01.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Mit dem demographischen Wandel versorgt auch die Chirurgie immer mehr betagte Menschen. Von Entwicklungen wie Fast-Track können auch ältere Menschen profitieren und bei proximaler Humerusfraktur können selbst manche 100-Jährige noch sicher operiert werden.

Sind Frauen die fähigeren Ärzte?

30.04.2024 Gendermedizin Nachrichten

Patienten, die von Ärztinnen behandelt werden, dürfen offenbar auf bessere Therapieergebnisse hoffen als Patienten von Ärzten. Besonders gilt das offenbar für weibliche Kranke, wie eine Studie zeigt.

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Arthroskopie kann Knieprothese nicht hinauszögern

25.04.2024 Gonarthrose Nachrichten

Ein arthroskopischer Eingriff bei Kniearthrose macht im Hinblick darauf, ob und wann ein Gelenkersatz fällig wird, offenbar keinen Unterschied.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with electrodiagnostic findings in the evaluation of clinical radiculopathy: a cross-sectional study

Surgical site infection in spinal surgery: a comparative study between 2-octyl-cyanoacrylate and staples for wound closure

Answer to the letter to the editor of Hong-Bin Guo et al. entitled “Anterior versus posterior approach for treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: a meta-analysis” by Gui Jun Xu, Zhi Jun Li, Jian Xiong Ma, Tao Zhang, Xin Fu, Xin Long Ma (2013); Eur Spine J (2013) 22:2176–2183

Letter regarding article by Xu et al.: anterior versus posterior approach for treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures: a meta-analysis

Dural tears in primary decompressive lumbar surgery. Is primary repair necessary for a good outcome?