Key result
General Practitioners utilized absolute cardiovascular disease risk within three distinct communication strategies ('positive', 'scare tactic', and 'indirect') tailored to their perception of patient risk, motivation, and anxiety.
GPs tailor their communication of absolute CVD risk using 'positive', 'scare tactic', or 'indirect' strategies based on patient characteristics like risk level, motivation, and anxiety.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
GPs' varied risk communication strategies signal ongoing barriers to guideline uptake; leaves open need for tested interventions to standardize absolute risk discussions.
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines encourage assessment of absolute CVD risk - the probability of a CVD event within a fixed time period, based on the most predictive risk factors. However, few General Practitioners (GPs) use absolute CVD risk consistently, and communication difficulties have been identified as a barrier to changing practice. This study aimed to explore GPs' descriptions of their CVD risk communication strategies, including the role of absolute risk. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 25 GPs in New South Wales, Australia. Transcribed audio-recordings were thematically coded, using the Framework Analysis method to ensure rigour. RESULTS: GPs used absolute CVD risk within three different communication strategies: 'positive', 'scare tactic', and 'indirect'. A 'positive' strategy, which aimed to reassure and motivate, was used for patients with low risk, determination to change lifestyle, and some concern about CVD risk. Absolute risk was used to show how they could reduce risk. A 'scare tactic' strategy was used for patients with high risk, lack of motivation, and a dismissive attitude. Absolute risk was used to 'scare' them into taking action. An 'indirect' strategy, where CVD risk was not the main focus, was used for patients with low risk but some lifestyle risk factors, high anxiety, high resistance to change, or difficulty understanding probabilities. Non-quantitative absolute risk formats were found to be helpful in these situations. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated how GPs use three different communication strategies to address the issue of CVD risk, depending on their perception of patient risk, motivation and anxiety. Absolute risk played a different role within each strategy. Providing GPs with alternative ways of explaining absolute risk, in order to achieve different communication aims, may improve their use of absolute CVD risk assessment in practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bonner et al. (2014) studied Cardiovascular disease risk communication (n=25). Cardiovascular disease risk communication was evaluated on GPs' descriptions of their CVD risk communication strategies and the role of absolute risk. General Practitioners utilized absolute cardiovascular disease risk within three distinct communication strategies ('positive', 'scare tactic', and 'indirect') tailored to their perception of patient risk, motivation, and anxiety.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: