Perils, pitfalls, and possibilities in talking about medical risk.

Virtually every course of medical action is associated with some adverse risk to the patient. Discussing these risks with patients is a fundamental duty of physicians both to fulfill a role as trusted adviser and to promote the ethical principle of autonomy (particularly as embodied in the doctrine of informed consent). Discussing medical risk is a difficult task to accomplish appropriately. Challenges stem from gaps in the physician's knowledge about pertinent risks, uncertainty about how much and what kind of information to communicate, and difficulties in communicating risk information in a format that is clearly understood by most patients. For example, a discussion of the risk of undergoing a procedure should be accompanied by a discussion of the risk of not undergoing a procedure. This article describes basic characteristics of risk information, outlines major challenges in communicating risk information, and suggests several ways to communicate risk information to patients in an understandable format. Ultimately, a combination of formats (eg, qualitative, quantitative, and graphic) may best accommodate the widely varying needs, preferences, and abilities of patients. Such communication will help the physician accomplish the fundamental duty of teaching the patient the information necessary to make an informed and appropriate decision.

[1]  D H Hickam,et al.  Patients' and Physicians' Interpretations of Graphic Data Displays , 1993, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[2]  A R Feinstein,et al.  Scientific standards in epidemiologic studies of the menace of daily life. , 1988, Science.

[3]  D. Hickam,et al.  Patient preferences , 1993, Journal of general internal medicine.

[4]  D. Sackett Inference and decision at the bedside. , 1989, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

[5]  N D Weinstein,et al.  Using time intervals between expected events to communicate risk magnitudes. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  B Fischhoff,et al.  Risk perception and communication unplugged: twenty years of process. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[7]  D L Sackett,et al.  An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  M. Nakao,et al.  Numbers are better than words. Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. , 1983, The American journal of medicine.

[9]  Risk Watch: The Odds of Life , 1985 .

[10]  D. Sackett,et al.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect , 1995, BMJ.

[11]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[12]  P M Sandman,et al.  High risk or low: how location on a "risk ladder" affects perceived risk. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[13]  S G Pauker,et al.  Impact of patient preferences on the selection of therapy. , 1981, Journal of chronic diseases.

[14]  R. Pearlman,et al.  Consent in medical decision making , 1988, Journal of general internal medicine.

[15]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[16]  D H Hickam,et al.  Patients' Preferences for Risk Disclosure and Role in Decision Making for Invasive Medical Procedures , 1997, Journal of general internal medicine.

[17]  W. Hendee,et al.  The expression of health risk information. , 1989, Archives of internal medicine.

[18]  Merriam-Webster Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary , 1998 .

[19]  M. J. Quadrel,et al.  Risk perception and communication , 2008 .

[20]  P. Slovic Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[21]  H. Llewellyn-Thomas,et al.  Patients' Health-care Decision Making , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[22]  D H Hickam,et al.  Patients’ interpretations of probability terms , 1991, Journal of general internal medicine.

[23]  Barry D. Weiss,et al.  Communicating with patients who have limited literacy skills. Report of the National Work Group on Literacy and Health. , 1998, The Journal of family practice.

[24]  A. Feinstein Invidious comparisons and unmet clinical challenges. , 1992, The American journal of medicine.

[25]  K. Calman,et al.  Cancer: science and society and the communication of risk , 1996, BMJ.

[26]  R M Arnold,et al.  Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions. , 1992, The American journal of medicine.

[27]  D H Hickam,et al.  Treatment Preferences of Patients and Physicians , 1990, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[28]  L. Siminoff,et al.  Effects of outcome framing on treatment decisions in the real world: impact of framing on adjuvant breast cancer decisions. , 1989, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[29]  E A Crouch,et al.  Risk assessment and comparisons: an introduction. , 1987, Science.

[30]  How medical professionals evaluate expressions of probability. , 1987, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  B. Cohen,et al.  A catalog of risks. , 1979, Health physics.

[32]  PhD Dr. Dennis J. Mazur MD,et al.  How age, outcome severity, and scale influence general medicine clinic patients’ interpretations of verbal probability terms , 2007, Journal of General Internal Medicine.