Open AccessAn absence of equipoise: Examining surgeons’ decision talk during encounters with women considering breast cancer surgery
Author(s) -
Mary C. Politi,
Catherine Saunders,
Victoria F. Grabinski,
Renata W. Yen,
Amy Cyr,
Marie-Anne Durand,
Glyn Elwyn
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0260704
Subject(s) - conversation , intervention (counseling) , medicine , decision aids , conversation analysis , deliberation , family medicine , mastectomy , breast cancer , psychology , nursing , alternative medicine , cancer , pathology , communication , politics , political science , law
Shared decision-making is recommended for decisions with multiple reasonable options, yet clinicians often subtly or explicitly guide choices. Using purposive sampling, we performed a secondary analysis of 142 audio-recorded encounters between 13 surgeons and women eligible for breast-conserving surgery with radiation or mastectomy. We trained 9 surgeons in shared decision-making and provided them one of two conversation aids; 4 surgeons practiced as usual. Based on a published taxonomy of treatment recommendations ( pronouncements , suggestions , proposals , offers , assertions ), we examined how surgeons framed choices with patients. Many surgeons made assertions providing information and advice (usual care 71% vs. intervention 66%; p = 0.54). Some made strong pronouncements (usual care 51% vs. intervention 36%; p = .09). Few made proposals and offers , leaving the door open for deliberation (proposals usual care 21% vs. intervention 26%; p = 0.51; offers usual care 40% vs. intervention 40%; p = 0.98). Surgeons were significantly more likely to describe options as comparable when using a conversation aid, mentioning this in all intervention group encounters (usual care 64% vs. intervention 100%; p<0.001). Conversation aids can facilitate offers of comparable options, but other conversational actions can inhibit aspects of shared decision-making.