A Survey of Gynecologists' Attitudes Regarding Decision Making in the Management of Non-cancerous Conditions That Frequently Result in Hysterectomy

James G. Dolan and Fred M. Howard

Medical Decision Making, 1999, vol. 19, issue 2, 186-192

Abstract: Objective. To explore attitudes of practicing gynecologists regarding making treatment decisions for patients with benign uterine conditions frequently treated with hysterec tomy. Design. Mailed survey. Participants. 66 gynecologists practicing in the Greater Rochester, New York, area. Interventions. After reading brief vignettes, respondents indicated how they would treat patients with chronic pelvic pain, uterine leiomyomas, and abnormal uterine bleeding, and rated the importance of 24 considerations in mak ing their treatment decisions on a 1-to-5 scale ranging from not important to extremely important. Results. Fourteen considerations (58%) had group mean importance ratings higher than 3. Exploratory factor analysis identified four factors that accounted for 96% of the variance. Respondent gender, practice type, graduation from a U.S. vs a non- U.S. medical school, and opinion regarding roles of doctor and patient in making treat ment decisions were associated with significant differences in factor scores. Conclu sions. Gynecologists' attitudes toward hysterectomy decisions are complex, multifactorial, and variable. Depending on the extent to which these attitudes affect treatment decisions, differences among gynecologists in their clinical decision making processes could account for a substantial amount of the regional variability in hyster ectomy use. Key words: decision making; hysterectomy, physician-patient relation ship. (Med Decis Making 1999;19:186-192)

Date: 1999
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9901900209 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:19:y:1999:i:2:p:186-192

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900209

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().