Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct;174(10):1614-21.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.3328.

How cardiologists present the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions to patients with stable angina: a qualitative analysis

Sarah L Goff  1 , Kathleen M Mazor  2 , Henry H Ting  3 , Reva Kleppel  4 , Michael B Rothberg  5
Affiliations

How cardiologists present the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions to patients with stable angina: a qualitative analysis

Sarah L Goff et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Oct.

Abstract

Importance: Patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) attribute greater benefit to percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) than indicated in clinical trials. Little is known about how cardiologists' presentation of the benefits and risks may influence patients' perceptions.

Objectives: To broadly describe the content of discussions between patients and cardiologists regarding angiogram and PCI for stable CAD, and to describe elements that may affect patients' understanding.

Design, setting, and participants: Qualitative content analysis of encounters between cardiologists and patients with stable CAD who participated in the Verilogue Point-of-Practice Database between March 1, 2008, and August 31, 2012. Transcripts in which angiogram and PCI were discussed were retrieved from the database. Patients were aged 44 to 88 years (median, 64 years); 25% were women; 50% reported symptoms of angina; and 6% were taking more than 1 medication to treat angina.

Main outcomes and measures: Results of conventional and directed qualitative content analysis.

Results: Forty encounters were analyzed. Five major categories and subcategories of factors that may affect patients' understanding of benefit were identified: (1) rationale for recommending angiogram and PCI (eg, stress test results, symptoms, and cardiologist's preferences); (2) discussion of benefits (eg, accurate discussion of benefit [5%], explicitly overstated benefit [13%], and implicitly overstated benefit [35%]); (3) discussion of risks (eg, minimization of risk); (4) cardiologist's communication style (eg, humor, teach-back, message framing, and failure to respond to patient questions); and (5) patient and family member contributions to the discussion.

Conclusions and relevance: Few cardiologists discussed the evidence-based benefits of angiogram and PCI for stable CAD, and some implicitly or explicitly overstated the benefits. The etiology of patient misunderstanding is likely multifactorial, but if future quantitative studies support the findings of this hypothesis-generating analysis, modifications to cardiologists' approach to describing the risks and benefits of the procedure may improve patient understanding.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Comment in

  • Fighting the "oculostenotic reflex".
    Lin GA, Dudley RA. Lin GA, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Oct;174(10):1621-2. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.164. JAMA Intern Med. 2014. PMID: 25156005 No abstract available.

References

    1. Bangalore S, Pursnani S, Kumar S, Bagos PG. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy for prevention of spontaneous myocardial infarction in subjects with stable ischemic heart disease. Circulation. 2013;127(7):769–781. - PubMed
    1. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–1516. - PubMed
    1. Stergiopoulos K, Brown DL. Initial coronary stent implantation with medical therapy vs medical therapy alone for stable coronary artery disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(4):312–319. - PubMed
    1. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. Coronary Revascularization Writing Group; Technical Panel; Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force; American College of Cardiology Foundation; American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society of Thoracic Surgeons; American Association of Thoracic Surgery; American Heart Association; American Society of Nuclear Cardiology; Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;143(4):780–803. - PubMed
    1. Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. COURAGE Trial Investigators. Impact of optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term cardiovascular end points in patients with stable coronary artery disease (from the COURAGE Trial) Am J Cardiol. 2009;104(1):1–4. - PubMed

Publication types