• J T King, H Yonas, M B Horowitz, A B Kassam, and M S Roberts.
• Section of Neurosurgery, VA Connecticut Healthcare System/112, 950 Campbell Avenue, West Haven, CT 06516, USA. Joseph.KingJr@med.va.gov
• J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 2005 Apr 1; 76 (4): 550-4.

ObjectiveTo assess communication between vascular neurosurgeons and their patients with unruptured cerebral aneurysms about treatment options and expected outcomes.MethodsVascular neurosurgeons and their patients with cerebral aneurysms were surveyed immediately following outpatient appointments in a neurosurgery clinic. Data collected included how well the patient understood their aneurysm treatment options, the risks of a poor outcome from various treatments, and the consensus "best" treatment. Patient and neurosurgeon responses were measured using Likert scales, multiple choice questions, and visual analogue scales. Agreement between patient and neurosurgeon was assessed with kappa scores. The Wilcoxon sign rank test was used to compare visual analogue scale responses.ResultsData for 44 patient-neurosurgeon pairs were collected. Only 61% of patient-neurosurgeon pairs agreed on the best treatment plan for the patient's aneurysm (kappa = 0.51, moderate agreement). Among the neurosurgeons, agreement with their patients ranged from 82% (kappa = 0.77, almost perfect agreement) to 52% (kappa = 0.37, fair agreement). Patients estimated much higher risks of stroke or death from surgical clipping, endovascular embolisation, or no intervention compared with the estimates offered by their neurosurgeons (surgical clipping: patient 36% v neurosurgeon 13%, p<0.001; endovascular embolisation: patient 35% v neurosurgeon 19%, p = 0.040; and noInterventionpatient 63% v neurosurgeon 25%, p<0.001).ConclusionsFollowing consultation with a vascular neurosurgeon, many patients with cerebral aneurysms have an inaccurate understanding of their aneurysm treatment plan and an exaggerated sense of the risks of aneurysmal disease and treatment.

22 keywords...

hide…