Informed decision-making in elective major vascular surgery: analysis of 145 surgeon–patient consultations

BACKGROUND: Prior studies show significant gaps in the informed decision-making process, a central goal of surgical care. These studies have been limited by their focus on low-risk decisions, single visits rather than entire consultations, or both. Our objectives were, first, to rate informed decision-making for major elective vascular surgery based on audiotapes of actual physician-patient conversations and, second, to compare ratings of informed decision-making for first visits to ratings for multiple visits by the same patient over time. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients for whom vascular surgical treatment was a potential option at a tertiary care outpatient vascular surgery clinic. We audio-taped all surgeon-patient conversations, including multiple visits when necessary, until a decision was made. Using an existing method, we evaluated the transcripts for elements of decision-making, including basic elements (e.g., an explanation of the clinical condition), intermediate elements (e.g., risks and benefits) and complex elements (e.g., uncertainty around the decision). RESULTS: We analyzed 145 surgeon-patient consultations. Overall, 45% of consultations contained complex elements, whereas 23% did not contain the basic elements of decision-making. For the 67 consultations that involved multiple visits, ratings were significantly higher when evaluating all visits (50% complex elements) compared with evaluating only the first visit (33% complex elements, p < 0.001.) CONCLUSION: We found that 45% of consultations contained complex elements, which is higher than prior studies with similar methods. Analyzing decision-making over multiple visits yielded different results than analyzing decision-making for single visits.