IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v22y2002i3p272-278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“You’re Perfect for the Procedure! Why Don’t You Want It?†Elderly Arthritis Patients’ Unwillingness to Consider Total Joint Arthroplasty Surgery: A Qualitative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Pamela L. Hudak

    (Hospital for Sick Children and the Department of Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto)

  • Jocalyn P. Clark

    (Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Toronto, and the Centre for Research in Women’s Health, Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto)

  • Gillian A. Hawker

    (Departments of Medicine and Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, and Clinical Epidemiology and Health Care Research Program, University of Toronto, and Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto)

  • Peter C. Coyte

    (Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto)

  • Nizar N. Mahomed

    (Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery and Health Policy, Management and Administration, University of Toronto, and the Toronto Western Hospital)

  • Hans J. Kreder

    (Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery and Health Policy, Management and Administration, University of Toronto, and Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto)

  • James G. Wright

    (Departments of Surgery and Public Health Sciences and Clinical Epidemiology and Health Care Research Program, University of Toronto, and the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto)

Abstract

Objective . To explore the process by which elderly persons make decisions about a surgical treatment, total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Methods . In-depth interviews with 17 elderly individuals identified as potential candidates for TJA who were unwilling to undergo the procedure. Results . For the majority of participants, decision making involved ongoing deliberation of the surgical option, often resulting in a deferral of the treatment decision. Three assumptions may constrain elderly persons from making a decision about surgery. First, some participants viewed osteoarthritis not as a disease but as a normal part of aging. Second, despite being candidates for TJA according to medical criteria, many participants believed candidacy required a level of pain and disability higher than their current level. Third, some participants believed that if they either required or would benefit from TJA, their physicians would advise surgery. Conclusion . These assumptions may limit the possibility for shared decision making. Clinical Implications . Emphasis should be directed toward thinking about ways in which discussions about TJA might be initiated (and by whom) and considering how patients’ views on and knowledge of osteoarthritis in general might be addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Pamela L. Hudak & Jocalyn P. Clark & Gillian A. Hawker & Peter C. Coyte & Nizar N. Mahomed & Hans J. Kreder & James G. Wright, 2002. "“You’re Perfect for the Procedure! Why Don’t You Want It?†Elderly Arthritis Patients’ Unwillingness to Consider Total Joint Arthroplasty Surgery: A Qualitative Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(3), pages 272-278, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:3:p:272-278
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0202200315
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0202200315
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0202200315?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles, Cathy & Gafni, Amiram & Whelan, Tim, 1997. "Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 681-692, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manuel Antonio Espinoza & Andrea Manca & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2018. "Social value and individual choice: The value of a choice‐based decision‐making process in a collectively funded health system," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 28-40, February.
    2. Hyojung Tak & Gregory Ruhnke & Ya-Chen Shih, 2015. "The Association between Patient-Centered Attributes of Care and Patient Satisfaction," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(2), pages 187-197, April.
    3. Miller, Nancy & Weinstein, Marcie, 2007. "Participation and knowledge related to a nursing home admission decision among a working age population," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 303-313, January.
    4. France Légaré & Annette M. O'Connor & Ian D. Graham & Georges A. Wells & Stéphane Tremblay, 2006. "Impact of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework on the Agreement and the Difference between Patients' and Physicians' Decisional Conflict," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(4), pages 373-390, July.
    5. Odette Wegwarth & Wolfgang Gaissmaier & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2011. "Deceiving Numbers," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(3), pages 386-394, May.
    6. Karnieli-Miller, Orit & Eisikovits, Zvi, 2009. "Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-8, July.
    7. Paul C. Schroy III & Karen Emmons & Ellen Peters & Julie T. Glick & Patricia A. Robinson & Maria A. Lydotes & Shamini Mylvanaman & Stephen Evans & Christine Chaisson & Michael Pignone & Marianne Prout, 2011. "The Impact of a Novel Computer-Based Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(1), pages 93-107, January.
    8. Mei-Chun Cheung & Derry Law & Joanne Yip & Jason Pui Yin Cheung, 2022. "Adolescents’ Experience during Brace Treatment for Scoliosis: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Meike Müller-Engelmann & Norbert Donner-Banzhoff & Heidi Keller & Lydia Rosinger & Carsten Sauer & Kerstin Rehfeldt & Tanja Krones, 2013. "When Decisions Should Be Shared," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(1), pages 37-47, January.
    10. Margaret Gerteis & Rosemary Borck, "undated". "Shared Decision-Making in Practice: Lessons from Implementation Efforts," Mathematica Policy Research Reports f802e52b8442486594ecda927, Mathematica Policy Research.
    11. Mark Sculpher & Amiram Gafni, 2001. "Recognizing diversity in public preferences: The use of preference sub‐groups in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 317-324, June.
    12. repec:plo:pone00:0186458 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    14. Ruth Astbury & Ashley Shepherd & Helen Cheyne, 2017. "Working in partnership: the application of shared decision‐making to health visitor practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1-2), pages 215-224, January.
    15. Vivek Goel & Carol A. Sawka & Elaine C. Thiel & Elaine H. Gort & Annette M. O’Connor, 2001. "Randomized Trial of a Patient Decision Aid for Choice of Surgical Treatment for Breast Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 1-6, February.
    16. Solomon, Josie & Knapp, Peter & Raynor, D.K. & Atkin, Karl, 2013. "Worlds apart? An exploration of prescribing and medicine-taking decisions by patients, GPs and local policy makers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 264-272.
    17. Debra Kerr & Rosie Crone & Trisha Dunning, 2020. "Perspectives about dignity during acute care for older people and their relatives: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(21-22), pages 4116-4127, November.
    18. Andrew J. Vickers & Paul Bennett, 2024. "“Sensemaking†to Aid Shared Decision Making in Clinical Practice: A Personal Response to Information Overload and Decision Abdication," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 44(6), pages 607-610, August.
    19. Tate, Alexandra, 2020. "Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    20. Wirtz, Veronika & Cribb, Alan & Barber, Nick, 2006. "Patient-doctor decision-making about treatment within the consultation--A critical analysis of models," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 116-124, January.
    21. K. Tiller & B. Meiser & C. Gaff & J. Kirk & T. Dudding & K.-A. Phillips & M. Friedlander & K. Tucker, 2006. "A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid for Women at Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(4), pages 360-372, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:22:y:2002:i:3:p:272-278. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.