The Trust-Behavior Paradox in Orthopedic Care: A National Survey of Care-Seeking, Misinformation, and Non-Physician Information Sources.

IF 1.6 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Reviews Pub Date : 2026-05-22 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.52965/001c.162078
Maya Lee, Latha Ganti
{"title":"The Trust-Behavior Paradox in Orthopedic Care: A National Survey of Care-Seeking, Misinformation, and Non-Physician Information Sources.","authors":"Maya Lee, Latha Ganti","doi":"10.52965/001c.162078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trust in physicians remains a cornerstone of effective healthcare delivery; however, the rapid expansion of online and non-physician health information sources has introduced new challenges to patient decision-making. In orthopedic practice, delayed evaluation of musculoskeletal symptoms-particularly those concerning for malignancy-may be influenced by misinformation and alternative care pathways.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional, nationally weighted survey of U.S. adults (n=200) to evaluate care-seeking behavior, trust in information sources, and endorsement of cancer-related misconceptions. The survey assessed willingness to delay care for persistent bone or back pain, reliance on physician versus non-physician information sources, and responses to conflicting health information. Stratified analyses were performed based on chronic pain status and prior cancer-related experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although 85% of respondents identified physicians as their most trusted source of health information, 55% reported regular use of online or social media platforms. A substantial proportion of participants reported willingness to delay care for ≥3 weeks or until symptom progression. Individuals with chronic pain demonstrated significantly higher odds of delayed care-seeking (p<0.05) and misinformation endorsement (OR 1.5-2.5, p<0.05). Reliance on online information was independently associated with delayed medical evaluation (OR ~2.0, p<0.01). Notably, a subset of respondents reported prioritizing online information over physician recommendations when conflicts arose, representing the highest-risk group for delayed care.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A pronounced trust-behavior paradox exists in orthopedic care, wherein high trust in physicians does not consistently translate into timely care-seeking. Misinformation and reliance on non-physician information sources contribute to diagnostic delay, particularly among individuals with chronic pain or prior cancer-related experience. Targeted patient education and engagement in digital information spaces are critical to mitigating these risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":19669,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Reviews","volume":"18 ","pages":"162078"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13198897/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.162078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Trust in physicians remains a cornerstone of effective healthcare delivery; however, the rapid expansion of online and non-physician health information sources has introduced new challenges to patient decision-making. In orthopedic practice, delayed evaluation of musculoskeletal symptoms-particularly those concerning for malignancy-may be influenced by misinformation and alternative care pathways.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, nationally weighted survey of U.S. adults (n=200) to evaluate care-seeking behavior, trust in information sources, and endorsement of cancer-related misconceptions. The survey assessed willingness to delay care for persistent bone or back pain, reliance on physician versus non-physician information sources, and responses to conflicting health information. Stratified analyses were performed based on chronic pain status and prior cancer-related experience.

Results: Although 85% of respondents identified physicians as their most trusted source of health information, 55% reported regular use of online or social media platforms. A substantial proportion of participants reported willingness to delay care for ≥3 weeks or until symptom progression. Individuals with chronic pain demonstrated significantly higher odds of delayed care-seeking (p<0.05) and misinformation endorsement (OR 1.5-2.5, p<0.05). Reliance on online information was independently associated with delayed medical evaluation (OR ~2.0, p<0.01). Notably, a subset of respondents reported prioritizing online information over physician recommendations when conflicts arose, representing the highest-risk group for delayed care.

Conclusion: A pronounced trust-behavior paradox exists in orthopedic care, wherein high trust in physicians does not consistently translate into timely care-seeking. Misinformation and reliance on non-physician information sources contribute to diagnostic delay, particularly among individuals with chronic pain or prior cancer-related experience. Targeted patient education and engagement in digital information spaces are critical to mitigating these risks.

骨科护理中的信任-行为悖论:一项关于求医、错误信息和非医生信息源的全国调查。
背景:对医生的信任仍然是有效医疗服务的基石;然而,在线和非医生健康信息来源的迅速扩张给患者决策带来了新的挑战。在骨科实践中,对肌肉骨骼症状的延迟评估,特别是那些与恶性肿瘤有关的症状,可能受到错误信息和替代治疗途径的影响。方法:我们对美国成年人(n=200)进行了横断面、全国加权调查,以评估求医行为、对信息来源的信任以及对癌症相关误解的认可。调查评估了延迟治疗持续性骨骼或背部疼痛的意愿,对医生与非医生信息来源的依赖,以及对相互矛盾的健康信息的反应。根据慢性疼痛状态和既往癌症相关经历进行分层分析。结果:尽管85%的受访者认为医生是他们最信任的健康信息来源,但55%的受访者表示经常使用在线或社交媒体平台。相当比例的参与者报告愿意延迟治疗≥3周或直到症状进展。结论:在骨科护理中存在明显的信任-行为悖论,对医生的高度信任并不能始终转化为及时求医。错误的信息和对非医生信息来源的依赖导致诊断延迟,特别是在患有慢性疼痛或既往癌症相关经历的个体中。有针对性的患者教育和数字信息空间的参与对于减轻这些风险至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopedic Reviews
Orthopedic Reviews ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
122
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Reviews is an Open Access, online-only, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles concerned with any aspect of orthopedics, as well as diagnosis and treatment, trauma, surgical procedures, arthroscopy, sports medicine, rehabilitation, pediatric and geriatric orthopedics. All bone-related molecular and cell biology, genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology papers are also welcome. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, reviews and case reports of general interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书