An international comparison of physicians' judgments of outcome rates of cardiac procedures and attitudes toward risk, uncertainty, justifiability, and regret

Abstract

Objective: Compare U.K. and U.S. physicians' judgments of population probabilities of important outcomes of invasive cardiac procedures; and values held by them about risk, uncertainty, regret, and justifiability relevant to utilization of cardiac treatments.

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: University hospital and VA medical center in the United States; two teaching hospitals in the United Kingdom.

Participants: 171 housestaff and attendings at U.S. teaching hospitals; 51 physician trainees and consultants at U.K. hospitals.

Measures: Judgments of probabilities of severe complications and deaths due to Swan-Ganz catheterization, cardiac catheterization, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); judgments of malpractice risks for case vignettes; Nightingale's risk-aversion instrument; Gerrity's reaction-to-uncertainty instrument; questions about need to justify decisions; responses to case vignettes regarding regret.

Results: The U.S. physicians judged rates of two bad outcomes of cardiac procedures (complications due to cardiac catheterization; death due to CABG) to be significantly higher (p < or = 0.01) than did the U.K. physicians (U.S. medians, 5 and 3.5, respectively; U.K. medians 3 and 2). The median ratio of (risk of malpractice suit I error of omission)/(risk of suit I error of commission) judged by U.K. physicians, 3, was significantly (p=0.0006) higher than that judged by U.S. physicians, 1.5. The U.K. physicians were less often risk-seeking in the context of possible losses than the U.S. physicians (odds ratio for practicing in the U.K. as a predictor of risk seeking 0.3, p=0.003). The U.K. physicians had significantly more discomfort with uncertainty than did the U.S. physicians, as reflected by higher scores on the stress scale (U.K. median 48, U.S. 42, p=0.0001) and the reluctance-to-disclose-uncertainty scale (U.K. 40, U.S. 37, p < 0.0001) of the Gerrity instrument. There was no clear international difference in perceived need to justify decisions, or in regret.

Conclusions: The results were not clearly consistent with the uncertainty hypothesis that international practice variation is due to differences in judged rates of outcomes of therapy or with the imperfect-agency hypothesis that practice variation is due to differences in physicians' personal values. The causes and implications of practice variations remain unclear.