The Influences of SES on Patient Choice of Doctor: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

As patients become increasingly involved in healthcare decision-making, it is important to examine the drivers behind patient choice of doctor (PCOD); the initial decision can have lasting impacts on patients' trust in providers and health outcomes. However, limited studies have explored PCOD relative to socioeconomic status (SES) or health disparity. This review identified similar preferences and varied decision criteria in PCOD across SES groups.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and relevant cross-references were searched for articles published between January 2007-September 2022. Papers were screened using Covidence. Included studies examined PCOD by income and/or educational levels. Analysis was performed in 2022-2023.

RESULTS

From 4,449 search results, 29 articles were selected (16 countries, 14 medical specialties, total of 32,651 participants). Individuals of higher SES ranked physician characteristics (e.g., qualifications, empathy) or performance more important than cost or convenience. Individuals of lower SES often had to prioritize logistical factors (e.g., insurance coverage, distance) due to resource constraints and gaps in knowledge or awareness about options. Despite differing healthcare systems, such divergence in PCOD were relatively consistent across countries. Some patients, especially females and disadvantaged groups, favored gender-concordant physicians for intimate medical matters (e.g., gynecologist); this partiality was not limited to conservative cultures. Few researchers investigated the outcomes of PCOD and indicated that lower-SES populations inadvertently chose, experienced, or perceived lower quality of care.

DISCUSSION

Patients' decision criteria varied by SES, even under national systems intended for universal access, indicating the impacts of social determinants and structural inequities. Health education supporting patient decision-making and research on how SES affects PCOD and outcomes could help reduce health disparity.

Analyzing Factors Influencing Patient Selection of a Surgeon for Elective Surgery in Saudi Arabia: A Questionnaire-Based Survey

BACKGROUND

Nowadays patients are encouraged to partake in healthcare decision making and patient preferences are given increasing weight. Patient's choice is important to reduce waiting time and to encourage competition between providers, as most patients look for high-quality care while minimizing costs, according to different studies this may not be as simple as the attributes and factors that patients value when selecting a hospital or surgeon. Overall, Saudi Arabia has minimal research on how patients select surgeons or surgical facilities. Therefore, the goal of the current study was to evaluate the criteria Saudi population patients used to select their surgeons.

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to determine the relative importance of the following aspects that patients may consider when selecting a surgeon: (a) physician-related considerations; (b) elements relating to healthcare service and access; (c) the perspectives of patients on various factors.

METHODS

This observational cross-sectional study attempts to investigate the criteria that people in Saudi Arabia considered most important while selecting their surgeons. This study was conducted between August and November 2022. The questionnaire is also given in English along with Arabic.

RESULTS

Six hundred nine completed the survey with a response rate of 91.6%. Concerning physician-related factors considered when choosing a surgeon attitudes of the physician were the factor most significantly contributed to physician selection rather than reputation or professional experience and physician social media: (84.7%) mentioned that paying attention to patient's needs and opinions is important; sparing enough time for patients is important as reported by 83.9% of the participants; Personal care and hygiene is important for 83.4% of the participants; Communication skills were considered to be important as stated by 82.6% of the participants. Regarding healthcare services/access-related factors considered by patients in physician selection; it was found that patients considered hospital hygiene-cleanliness (91.3 %) as the most significant healthcare service/access-related factor in physician selection and then it comes Ease of obtaining an appointment (89.7%), reasonable scheduling and wait for time (87.7%) and cost of surgery (82.1%). Physician selection was deemed crucial to the success of the therapy by 87.7% of patients, while 88.3% of patients thought it was crucial to research the doctor before contacting her or him for the current admission.

CONCLUSION

Patients consider a wide range of variables when selecting their surgeons and the location of their procedure. Depending on sociodemographic, cultural, and other aspects, the conditions surrounding patients' decisions may vary. Overall, the selection of a surgeon by surgery patients appears to be more influenced by the doctor's attitudes than by his or her reputation, professional experience, or social media presence. In order to elicit preferences across a wider range of surgical subspecialties and patient demographics, more study is necessary.

Guidelines on the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms: updates from the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE)

The objective of these Guidelines was to revise and update the previous 2016 Italian Guidelines on Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Disease, in accordance with the National Guidelines System (SNLG), to guide every practitioner toward the most correct management pathway for this pathology. The methodology applied in this update was the GRADE-SIGN version methodology, following the instructions of the AGREE quality of reporting checklist as well. The first methodological step was the formulation of clinical questions structured according to the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) model according to which the Recommendations were issued. Then, systematic reviews of the Literature were carried out for each PICO question or for homogeneous groups of questions, followed by the selection of the articles and the assessment of the methodological quality for each of them using qualitative checklists. Finally, a Considered Judgment form was filled in for each clinical question, in which the features of the evidence as a whole are assessed to establish the transition from the level of evidence to the direction and strength of the recommendations. These guidelines outline the correct management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm in terms of screening and surveillance. Medical management and indication for surgery are discussed, as well as preoperative assessment regarding patients' background and surgical risk evaluation. Once the indication for surgery has been established, the options for traditional open and endovascular surgery are described and compared, focusing specifically on patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms as well. Finally, indications for early and late postoperative follow-up are explained. The most recent evidence in the Literature has been able to confirm and possibly modify the previous recommendations updating them, likewise to propose new recommendations on prospectively relevant topics.

Distance travelled to hospital for emergency laparotomy and the effect of travel time on mortality: cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether distance and estimated travel time to hospital for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy is associated with postoperative mortality.

DESIGN

National cohort study using data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit.

SETTING

171 National Health Service hospitals in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

22 772 adult patients undergoing emergency surgery on the gastrointestinal tract between 2013 and 2016.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mortality from any cause and in any place at 30 and 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Median on-road distance between home and hospital was 8.4 km (IQR 4.7-16.7 km) with a median estimated travel time of 16 min. Median time from hospital admission to operating theatre was 12.7 hours. Older patients live on average further from hospital and patients from areas of increased socioeconomic deprivation live on average less far away.We included estimated travel time as a continuous variable in multilevel logistic regression models adjusting for important confounders and found no evidence for an association with 30-day mortality (OR per 10 min of travel time=1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.06, p=0.512) or 90-day mortality (OR 1.02, 95 % CI 0.97 to 1.06, p=0.472).The results were similar when we limited our analysis to the subgroup of 5386 patients undergoing the most urgent surgery. 30-day mortality: OR=1.02 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.10, p=0.574) and 90-day mortality: OR=1.01 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.08, p=0.858).

CONCLUSIONS

In the UK NHS, estimated travel time between home and hospital was not a primary determinant of short-term mortality following emergency gastrointestinal surgery.

Is Age a Determinant Factor in EVAR as a Predictor of Outcomes or in the Selection Procedure? Our Experience

Introduction

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the therapy of choice in high risk patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm. The good results described are leading to the broadening of clinical indications to younger patients. However, reintervention rates seem higher and even with successful treatment sometimes there is growth of the aneurysm sac and rupture, meaning a failure of the therapeutic goal. This study proposes to analyse the impact of age in patients' selection and post-EVAR results.

Methods

The clinical records of consecutive patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair, between 2001 and 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided according to age groups (<70, 70-80 and >80 years). Gender, body mass index, aneurysm anatomic features, neck characteristics, iliac morphology, surgical indication, endograft type, anesthesic risk classification, length of stay, reinterventions and mortality were analysed and compared.

Results

The study included 171 patients, 161 (94.1%) men, and mean age 74.1±8.9 years. The age group under 70 had 32% of the patients. Only three characteristics were found different among age groups: 1) body mass index was higher in younger patients, with a considerable trend toward significance (P=0.06); 2) surgical indication, in the younger group, surgeon's and the patient's option were more proeminent (P<0.05); 3) erectile dysfunction was higher in elderly group (P<0.05). No other clinical and anatomical characteristics or final outcomes were found statisticaly different among age groups.

Conclusion

The absence of statistically differences in mortality and reinterventions among age groups suggests that age by itself is not a relevant factor in endovascular aneurysm repair. Indeed, the three characteristics different in younger (obesity, sexual function and patient's choice) favor endovascular aneurysm repair.

The evolving potential for pediatric ex vivo lung perfusion

Despite the rise in the number of adult lung transplantations performed, rates of pediatric lung transplantation remain low. Lung transplantation is an accepted therapy for pediatric end-stage lung disease; however, it is limited by a shortage of donor organs. EVLP has emerged as a platform for assessment and preservation of donor lung function. EVLP has been adopted in adult lung transplantation and has successfully led to increased adult lung transplantations and donor lung utilization. We discuss the future implications of EVLP utilization, specifically, its potential evolving role in overcoming donor shortages in smaller children and adolescents to improve the quality and outcomes of lung transplantation in pediatric patients.

A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context

BACKGROUND

Evidence synthesis has seen major methodological advances in reducing uncertainty and estimating the sizes of the effects. Much less is known about how to assess the relative value of different outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To identify studies that assessed preferences for outcomes in health conditions.

METHODS

SEARCH STRATEGY

we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library in February 2014.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

eligible studies investigated preferences of patients, family members, the general population or healthcare professionals for health outcomes. The intention of this review was to include studies which focus on theoretical alternatives; studies which assessed preferences for distinct treatments were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

study characteristics as study objective, health condition, participants, elicitation method, and outcomes assessed in the study were extracted.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four studies were identified and categorized into four groups: (1) multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) (n = 71), (2) rating or ranking (n = 25), (3) utility eliciting (n = 5) and (4) studies comparing different methods (n = 23). The number of outcomes assessed by method group varied. The comparison of different methods or subgroups within one study often resulted in different hierarchies of outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

A dominant method most suitable for application in evidence syntheses was not identified. As preferences of patients differ from those of other stakeholders (especially medical professionals), the choice of the group to be questioned is consequential. Further research needs to focus on validity and applicability of the identified methods.

National Vascular Registry Report on surgical outcomes and implications for vascular centres

Background

The National Vascular Registry Report on Surgical Outcomes (NVSRO) coincided with the update of the National Health Service Standard Contract for Specialized Vascular Services in Adults (NHSSCSVS). The latter promises patients minimum standards for vascular centres. The present study aimed to determine whether current data support the standards proposed in the NHSSCSVS.

Methods

Numbers of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs and carotid endarterectomies (CEAs) performed by hospital Trust and surgeon, and their outcomes were obtained from the NVRSO. These were assessed against NHSSCSVS recommendations that included: more than 60 AAA repairs per year per Trust, over 50 CEAs per year per Trust and at least six vascular surgeons per Trust.

Results

Based on NVRSO data, 107 hospital Trusts (92·2 per cent) would fail to meet the minimum standards required to achieve vascular centre status. Outcomes were poorer in these hospitals (overall mortality rate after AAA: 2·7 versus 1·3 per cent; P = 0·007). There were strong associations between number of AAA repairs or CEAs per Trust and better outcomes (AAA repair, P &lt; 0·001; CEA, P = 0·004). These remained significant when analysed by individual surgeon (AAA repair, P &lt; 0·001; CEA, P &lt; 0·001). Trusts undertaking 60 or fewer elective AAA repairs per year had significantly higher elective AAA mortality rates (2·7 versus 1·7 per cent; P = 0·010). Trusts performing a minimum of 50 CEAs per year had significantly lower perioperative mortality/morbidity rates (1·9 versus 3·0 per cent; P = 0·032). Trusts with seven or more surgeons demonstrated lower AAA-related mortality rates (1·7 versus 2·7 per cent; P = 0·018).

Conclusion

Data from the NVRSO suggest that the majority of hospital Trusts presently fail to meet the standards for vascular centre status. NVRSO data support a standard of more than 60 elective AAA repairs and 50 CEAs per Trust per year. A minimum of seven vascular surgeons per unit was associated with better outcomes. These data support the ongoing remodelling of vascular services in the UK.

Predicting aortic complications after endovascular aneurysm repair

Background

Lifelong surveillance is standard after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR), but remains costly, heterogeneous and poorly calibrated. This study aimed to develop and validate a scoring system for aortic complications after EVAR, informing rationalized surveillance.

Methods

Patients undergoing EVAR at two centres were studied from 2004 to 2010. Preoperative morphology was quantified using three-dimensional computed tomography according to a validated protocol, by investigators blinded to outcomes. Proportional hazards modelling was used to identify factors predicting aortic complications at the first centre, and thereby derive a risk score. Sidak tests between risk quartiles dichotomized patients to low- or high-risk groups. Aortic complications were reported by Kaplan–Meier analysis and risk groups were compared by log rank test. External validation was by comparison of aortic complications between risk groups at the second centre.

Results

Some 761 patients, with a median age of 75 (interquartile range 70–80) years, underwent EVAR. Median follow-up was 36 (range 11–94) months. Physiological variables were not associated with aortic complications. A morphological risk score incorporating maximum aneurysm diameter (P &lt; 0·001) and largest common iliac diameter (measured 10 mm from the internal iliac origin; P = 0·004) allocated 75 per cent of patients to a low-risk group, with excellent discrimination between 5-year rates of aortic complication in low- and high-risk groups at both centres (centre 1: 12 versus 31 per cent, P &lt; 0·001; centre 2: 12 versus 45 per cent, P = 0·002).

Conclusion

The risk score uses commonly available morphological data to stratify the rate of complications after EVAR. The proposals for rationalized surveillance could provide clinical and economic benefits.

Abdominal aortic aneurysms: endovascular options and outcomes - proliferating therapy, but effective?

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has a reported prevalence rate of 1.4% in the US. AAA rupture accounts for an estimated 15,000 deaths per year, rendering it the 10th leading cause of death in men over the age of 55. Endovascular repair (EVR) has proliferated in the last two decades as an increasingly popular alternative to traditional open surgery, and is now the default treatment in the majority of centres worldwide. This review article outlines the evidence supporting this stance. The development of EVR is reviewed, alongside trends in utilisation of this therapy over time. The evidence for the relative short-term and long-term outcomes of EVR and open AAA repair is discussed, and ongoing controversies surrounding the use of EVR are considered.

Determination of patient preference for location of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

OBJECTIVE

Aneurysm repair is centralized in higher volume centers resulting in reduced mortality, with longer travel distances. The purpose of this study is to explore patients' preference between local care versus longer distances and lower mortality rates.

METHODS

Patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) measuring 4 to 5 cm and living at least a 1-hour drive from our hospital were asked to assume it had grown to 5.5 cm, and repair was recommended with a mortality risk of 2%. The level of additional risk they would accept to undergo surgery locally was determined.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients were surveyed. If mortality risk was equivalent at the local and regional hospitals, 44% preferred care at our tertiary center, while 56% preferred surgery locally. If perioperative mortality was increased at the local hospital, 9% preferred local surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of patients with AAA will accept longer travel distances for care as long as it results in a reduction in perioperative mortality.

Patient preference survey in the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVES

Carotid stenosis accounts for 20% of ischemic strokes and can be managed with pharmacotherapy alone or in conjunction with carotid endarterectomy or stenting. The management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis is controversial amongst physicians. The aim of this study was to explore patient preferences for the potential management options using a standardized scenario to minimize clinician bias. These data will then be used to facilitate comparison with existing published data on physicians' preferences in the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

METHODS

A patient information booklet and questionnaire was developed, validated, and distributed to patients who were identified as candidates for carotid screening duplex based on the presence of peripheral arterial, coronary, or aneurismal disease. Patients were asked to imagine their duplex revealed a 70% unilateral carotid stenosis. Five-year stroke or death risks of 11% were quoted for best medical therapy. The perioperative stroke or death rates quoted were 3% for endarterectomy and 3% to 5% for stenting, based on best current evidence. No physician interaction was allowed to minimize clinician bias. Responses for treatment preference and reasoning were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. Results from this survey were then compared with a previously published poll of physician preference.

RESULTS

One hundred two questionnaires were analyzed with a 94% response rate: 48% chose pharmacotherapy alone, 30% selected carotid endarterectomy, and 22% opted for stenting. The preference for pharmacotherapy alone over either intervention, and for endarterectomy, over stenting was consistent in subgroup analyses by age, gender, prior stroke, family history of stroke, and smoking status.

CONCLUSION

In this scenario, patients were split equally between medical and surgical treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis. This was identical to a recent poll of physicians. Tools for risk assessment and the results of the SPACE2, ACST2, and ACT1 trials would benefit patients and physicians making this important treatment decision.

Volume-outcome relationships in vascular surgery: the current status

Vascular surgery has been widely practiced in hospitals within a general surgical service, although the consequent workload of individual vascular units has been small. There is an increasing body of evidence in favor of a positive relationship between hospital and surgeon volumes and the outcome of arterial surgery. These relationships suggest that vascular surgical procedures might be best placed within a centralized model of care to increase volume and thereby attain best outcomes. This systematic review appraises the current evidence for volume-outcome relationships in vascular surgery from a number of healthcare systems to examine the basis for centralization of vascular surgical services. The index procedures addressed in this review are open or endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), ruptured AAA, descending thoracic aortic aneurysm, and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, along with carotid endarterectomy and lower extremity arterial bypass.