480 likes | 497 Views
Evidence-based Communication Tips. How to not be a Spock when talking to your patients Scott Hippe , MD May 18,2019. I have no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest. Warm-up activity: take turns demonstrating the best and worst physician-patient communication you can imagine.
E N D
Evidence-based Communication Tips How to not be a Spock when talking to your patients Scott Hippe, MD May 18,2019
Warm-up activity: take turns demonstrating the best and worst physician-patient communication you can imagine
What features of communication do your patients appreciate the most?
Next warm-up activity:Communicate a 20% ASCVD risk and make a therapeutic recommendation, or make a recommendation for colon cancer screening
Low risk patients overestimate riskHigh risk patients underestimate risk
Describing risk qualitatively leads patients to a higher perceived risk Describing risk quantitativelyleads patients to a lower perceived risk
Note: probability of side effects as “very common” vs “15%” Berry (2002)
Patients’ threshold level of risk at which they consider an intervention justified is higher than that of physicians Patients also expect a greater decrease in risk to make an intervention worthwhile
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) is more accurate than relative risk reduction (RRR) Lipkin(2014)
RRR increases risk perception compared to ARR Lipkin(2014)
Including baseline risk with ARR or RRR improves accuracy and satisfaction Lipkin(2014)
Number needed to treat (NNT) is less helpful when talking to patients Lipkin(2014)
Qualitative risk descriptors showed lower accuracy and satisfaction as well as higher risk perception Lipkin(2014)
Positive framing decreases perceived risk and increases acceptance of harmful procedures Lipkin(2014)
Using denominator of 1000 led to greater comprehension than numerator of 1 or denominator of 100 Lipkin(2014)
Decision Aids: tying together evidence-based risk communication
https://statindecisionaid.mayoclinic.org/index.php/statin/indexhttps://statindecisionaid.mayoclinic.org/index.php/statin/index
https://patientdecisionaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/CRC-Infographic-V-7-11-20-15.pdfhttps://patientdecisionaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/CRC-Infographic-V-7-11-20-15.pdf
Cochrane on decision aids: “people exposed to decision aids feel more knowledgeable, better informed, and clearer about their values, and they probably have a more active role in decision making and more accurate risk perceptions” Stacey (2017)
Try to make your own icon array! • http://www.nntonline.net/visualrx/ • http://www.iconarray.com/
Conclusions Patient-centered communication makes a difference Be cognizant of how patients perceive risk Evidence-based communication improves understanding and helps patients make decisions in line with their values
References …First, a shout out to the Best Science Medicine podcast…
References • Mazzi, M et al. What do people appreciate in physicians’ communication? An international study with focus groups using videotaped medical consultations. Health Expectations (2015) 18(5):1215-1226. • Saha, S et al. The impact of patient-centered communication on patients’ decision making and evaluations of physicians: a randomized study using video vignettes. Patient EducCouns(2011) 84(3):386-392. • Van derWeijden, T et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in general practice: mismatch between cardiovascular risk and patients’ risk perceptions. Medical Decision Making (2007) 27(6):754-61. • Berry, DC et al. Provision of information about drug side-effects to patients. Lancet (2002) 359:853-4. • Douglas, F et al. Differing perceptions of intervention thresholds for fracture risk: a survey of patients and doctors. Osteoporosis International (2012) 23(8):2135-2140 • Lipkin, D et al. Evidence-based risk communication: a systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine (2014) 161:270-80. • Stacey, D et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Systematic Review (2017). • Chewning, B et al. Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. Patient Education and Counseling (2012) 86(1):9-18.