Effect of a discordant opinion offered by a second opinion physician on the patient’s decision for management of spinal disc disease

Abstract

BackgroundFactors that influence a patient’s decision for spinal surgery and selection of the spine surgeon have not been studied in the context of a Second Opinion (SO). Providing insight into these factors will guide surgeons in their discussion of treatment options with patients. ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the impact of a discordant SO on the final decision of patients as compared to their initial preference regarding spinal disc disease treatment for chronic neck and low back pain. Patient involvementPatients in this study engage in clinical vignettes designed to induce decisional conflict. MethodsA cross-sectional study using clinical vignette-based questionnaires was presented to patients at the Family Medicine, Orthopedic, and Neurosurgery clinics at a university-based tertiary academic medical center. ResultsA total of 246 patients participated in the study (response rate, 66.8%). Irrespective of the initial offered treatment, most patients wanted to consult a SO (64.2%). Most patients preferred conservative treatment to surgery after getting the initial recommendation (78.5%) and after getting a discordant SO (56.5%). There was an association between the agreement of the patient with the initial recommendation and the effect of the SO on the final decision of patients (p < 0.001). Patients who disagreed with the initially offered treatment were more likely to abide by their initial decision after the SO (80.8%) as compared to those who were in agreement (17.7%), while those who agreed with the initially offered treatment were more likely to change their decision (39.5%) or to take a third opinion (42.9%). DiscussionA discordant SO may validate patients’ wishes when they disagree with the initially offered treatment and may lead to confusion when they agree with the initial physicians’ recommendations. Practical valueAs patients tend to abide by their initial preference, physicians should explicitly consider patients’ wishes when discussing options for management of spinal disc disease.