TY - JOUR
T1 - "and i think that we can fix it"
T2 - Mental models used in high-risk surgical decision making
AU - Kruser, Jacqueline M.
AU - Pecanac, Kristen E.
AU - Brasel, Karen J.
AU - Cooper, Zara
AU - Steffens, Nicole M.
AU - McKneally, Martin F.
AU - Schwarze, Margaret L.
N1 - Funding Information:
Disclosure: The project described was supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, previously through the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) grant 1UL1RR025011 and now by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), grant UL1TR000427 (M.L.S.). This project was also supported by the Greenwall (Kornfeld) Program for Bioethics and Patient Care (M.L.S.) and the American Geriatrics Society Jahnigen Career Development Award, grant 1R03AG042361-01 NIH (Z.C.). These funding sources had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript for publication. No other financial support was declared for the remaining authors.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/4
Y1 - 2015/4
N2 - Objective: To examine how surgeons use the "fix-it" model to communicate with patients before high-risk operations. Background: The "fix-it" model characterizes disease as an isolated abnormality that can be restored to normal form and function through medical intervention. This mental model is familiar to patients and physicians, but it is ineffective for chronic conditions and treatments that cannot achieve normalcy. Overusemay lead to permissive decisionmaking favoring intervention. Efforts to improve surgical decision making will need to consider how mental models function in clinical practice, including "fix-it." Methods: We observed surgeons who routinely perform high-risk surgery during preoperative discussions with patients. We used qualitative content analysis to explore the use of "fix-it" in 48 audio-recorded conversations. Results: Surgeons used the "fix-it" model for 2 separate purposes during preoperative conversations: (1) as an explanatory tool to facilitate patient understanding of disease and surgery, and (2) as a deliberation framework to assist in decision making. Although surgeons commonly used "fix-it" as an explanatory model, surgeons explicitly discussed limitations of the "fix-it" model as an independent rationale for operating as they deliberated about the value of surgery. Conclusions: Although the use of "fix-it" is familiar for explaining medical information to patients, surgeons recognize that the model can be problematic for determining the value of an operation. Whether patients can transition between understanding how their disease is fixed with surgery to a subsequent deliberation about whether they should have surgery is unclear and may have broader implications for surgical decision making.
AB - Objective: To examine how surgeons use the "fix-it" model to communicate with patients before high-risk operations. Background: The "fix-it" model characterizes disease as an isolated abnormality that can be restored to normal form and function through medical intervention. This mental model is familiar to patients and physicians, but it is ineffective for chronic conditions and treatments that cannot achieve normalcy. Overusemay lead to permissive decisionmaking favoring intervention. Efforts to improve surgical decision making will need to consider how mental models function in clinical practice, including "fix-it." Methods: We observed surgeons who routinely perform high-risk surgery during preoperative discussions with patients. We used qualitative content analysis to explore the use of "fix-it" in 48 audio-recorded conversations. Results: Surgeons used the "fix-it" model for 2 separate purposes during preoperative conversations: (1) as an explanatory tool to facilitate patient understanding of disease and surgery, and (2) as a deliberation framework to assist in decision making. Although surgeons commonly used "fix-it" as an explanatory model, surgeons explicitly discussed limitations of the "fix-it" model as an independent rationale for operating as they deliberated about the value of surgery. Conclusions: Although the use of "fix-it" is familiar for explaining medical information to patients, surgeons recognize that the model can be problematic for determining the value of an operation. Whether patients can transition between understanding how their disease is fixed with surgery to a subsequent deliberation about whether they should have surgery is unclear and may have broader implications for surgical decision making.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937506106&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937506106&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000714
DO - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000714
M3 - Article
C2 - 25749396
AN - SCOPUS:84937506106
SN - 0003-4932
VL - 261
SP - 678
EP - 684
JO - Annals of Surgery
JF - Annals of Surgery
IS - 4
ER -