Communicating statin evidence to support shared decision-making.

BMC Fam Pract

Department of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53715, USA.

Published: April 2016

Background: The practice of clinical medicine rests on a foundation of ethical principles as well as scientific knowledge. Clinicians must artfully balance the principle of beneficence, doing what is best for patients, with autonomy, allowing patients to make their own well-informed health care decisions. The clinical communication process is complicated by varying degrees of confidence in scientific evidence regarding patient-oriented benefits, and by the fact that most medical options are associated with possible harms as well as potential benefits.

Discussion: Evidence-based clinical guidelines often neglect patient-oriented issues involved with the thoughtful practice of shared decision-making, where individual values, goals, and preferences should be prioritized. Guidelines on the use of statin medications for preventing cardiovascular events are a case in point. Current guidelines endorse the use of statins for people whose 10-year risk of cardiovascular events is as low as 7.5%. Previous guidelines set the 10-year risk benchmark at 20%. Meta-analysis of randomized trials suggests that statins can reduce cardiovascular event rates by about 25%, bringing 10-year risk from 7.5 to 5.6%, for example, or from 20 to 15%. Whether or not these benefits should justify the use of statins for individual patients depends on how those advantages are valued in comparison with disadvantages, such as side effect risks, and with inconveniences associated with taking a pill each day and visiting clinicians and laboratories regularly.

Conclusions: Whether or not the overall benefit-harm balance justifies the use of a medication for an individual patient cannot be determined by a guidelines committee, a health care system, or even the attending physician. Instead, it is the individual patient who has a fundamental right to decide whether or not taking a drug is worthwhile. Researchers and professional organizations should endeavor to develop shared decision-making tools that provide up-to-date best evidence in easily understandable formats, so as to assist clinicians in helping their patients to make the decisions that are right for them.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4822230PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0436-9DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

shared decision-making
12
10-year risk
12
health care
8
cardiovascular events
8
individual patient
8
guidelines
5
communicating statin
4
statin evidence
4
evidence support
4
support shared
4

Similar Publications

Unlabelled: Many breast cancer survivors experience cancer-related fatigue (CRF), and several interventions to treat CRF are available. One way to tailor intervention advice is based on patient preferences. In this study, we explore preference heterogeneity regarding between-attribute and within-attribute preferences.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: Early lung cancer screening (LCS) through low-dose CT (LDCT) is crucial but underused due to various barriers, including incomplete or inaccurate patient smoking data in the electronic health record and limited time for shared decision-making. The objective of this trial is to investigate a patient-centred intervention, MyLungHealth, delivered through the patient portal. The intervention is designed to improve LCS rates through increased identification of eligible patients and informed decision-making.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: A diagnosis of melanoma in situ presents negligible risk to a person's lifespan or physical well-being, but existing terminology makes it difficult for patients to distinguish these from higher risk invasive melanomas. This study aims to explore whether using an alternative label for melanoma in situ may influence patients' management choices and anxiety levels.

Methods And Analysis: This study is a between-subjects randomised online experiment, using hypothetical scenarios.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: End-of-life care is essential for older adults aged ≥60, particularly those residing in long-term care facilities, such as nursing homes, which are known for their home-like environments compared with hospitals. Due to potential limitations in medical resources, collaboration with external healthcare providers is crucial to ensure comprehensive services within these settings. Previous studies have primarily focused on team-based models for end-of-life care in hospitals and home-based settings.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Determining timeframes to death for imminently dying patients: a retrospective cohort study.

BMC Palliat Care

January 2025

Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Sturt Rd, Bedford Park, Adelaide, South Australia, 5042, Australia.

Background: Clinicians are frequently asked 'how long' questions at end-of-life by patients and those important to them, yet predicting timeframes to death remains uncertain, even in the last weeks and days of life. Patients and families wish to know so they can ask questions, plan, make decisions, have time to visit and say their goodbyes, and have holistic care needs met. Consequently, this necessitates a more accurate assessment of empirical data to better inform prognostication and reduce uncertainty around time until death.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!