Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine.

Jennifer M Langworthy, Lianne Forrest
{"title":"Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine.","authors":"Jennifer M Langworthy,&nbsp;Lianne Forrest","doi":"10.1186/1746-1340-18-27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The risk associated with cervical manipulation is controversial. Research in this area is widely variable but as yet the risk is not easily quantifiable. This presents a problem when informing the patient of risks when seeking consent and information may be withheld due to the fear of patient withdrawal from care. As yet, there is a lack of research into the frequency of risk disclosure and consequent withdrawal from manipulative treatment as a result. This study seeks to investigate the reality of this and to obtain insight into the attitudes of chiropractors towards informed consent and disclosure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Questionnaires were posted to 200 UK chiropractors randomly selected from the register of the General Chiropractic Council.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A response rate of 46% (n = 92) was achieved. Thirty-three per cent (n = 30) respondents were female and the mean number of years in practice was 10. Eighty-eight per cent considered explanation of the risks associated with any recommended treatment important when obtaining informed consent. However, only 45% indicated they always discuss this with patients in need of cervical manipulation. When asked whether they believed discussing the possibility of a serious adverse reaction to cervical manipulation could increase patient anxiety to the extent there was a strong possibility the patient would refuse treatment, 46% said they believed this could happen. Nonetheless, 80% said they believed they had a moral/ethical obligation to disclose risk associated with cervical manipulation despite these concerns. The estimated number of withdrawals throughout respondents' time in practice was estimated at 1 patient withdrawal for every 2 years in practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The withdrawal rate from cervical manipulation as a direct consequence of the disclosure of associated serious risks appears unfounded. However, notwithstanding legal obligations, reluctance to disclose risk due to fear of increasing patient anxiety still remains, despite acknowledgement of moral and ethical responsibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":87173,"journal":{"name":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","volume":"18 ","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1746-1340-18-27","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chiropractic & osteopathy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1340-18-27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: The risk associated with cervical manipulation is controversial. Research in this area is widely variable but as yet the risk is not easily quantifiable. This presents a problem when informing the patient of risks when seeking consent and information may be withheld due to the fear of patient withdrawal from care. As yet, there is a lack of research into the frequency of risk disclosure and consequent withdrawal from manipulative treatment as a result. This study seeks to investigate the reality of this and to obtain insight into the attitudes of chiropractors towards informed consent and disclosure.

Methods: Questionnaires were posted to 200 UK chiropractors randomly selected from the register of the General Chiropractic Council.

Results: A response rate of 46% (n = 92) was achieved. Thirty-three per cent (n = 30) respondents were female and the mean number of years in practice was 10. Eighty-eight per cent considered explanation of the risks associated with any recommended treatment important when obtaining informed consent. However, only 45% indicated they always discuss this with patients in need of cervical manipulation. When asked whether they believed discussing the possibility of a serious adverse reaction to cervical manipulation could increase patient anxiety to the extent there was a strong possibility the patient would refuse treatment, 46% said they believed this could happen. Nonetheless, 80% said they believed they had a moral/ethical obligation to disclose risk associated with cervical manipulation despite these concerns. The estimated number of withdrawals throughout respondents' time in practice was estimated at 1 patient withdrawal for every 2 years in practice.

Conclusion: The withdrawal rate from cervical manipulation as a direct consequence of the disclosure of associated serious risks appears unfounded. However, notwithstanding legal obligations, reluctance to disclose risk due to fear of increasing patient anxiety still remains, despite acknowledgement of moral and ethical responsibility.

与颈椎操作相关的风险披露的退出率。
背景:颈椎手法相关的风险是有争议的。这一领域的研究变化很大,但迄今为止,风险还不容易量化。这就在告知患者风险、寻求患者同意时产生了问题,而且由于担心患者退出治疗,信息可能会被隐瞒。到目前为止,缺乏对风险披露的频率和由此导致的退出操纵治疗的研究。本研究旨在调查这一现实,并深入了解脊医对知情同意和披露的态度。方法:向200名英国脊椎按摩师发放调查问卷,这些按摩师是从英国脊椎按摩综合委员会的注册名册中随机抽取的。结果:有效率为46% (n = 92)。33% (n = 30)的答复者是女性,平均执业年数为10年。88%的人认为,在获得知情同意时,解释与任何推荐治疗相关的风险很重要。然而,只有45%的人表示他们经常与需要颈椎推拿的患者讨论这个问题。当被问及他们是否认为讨论颈椎推拿的严重不良反应的可能性会增加患者的焦虑,以至于患者很有可能拒绝治疗时,46%的人表示他们相信这种情况会发生。尽管如此,80%的人表示,尽管存在这些担忧,但他们认为自己有道德/伦理义务披露与颈椎推拿相关的风险。在整个应答者的实践时间内,估计每2年有1名患者退出。结论:将颈椎推拿术的退出率作为披露相关严重风险的直接后果是没有根据的。然而,尽管有法律义务,由于担心增加患者焦虑,不愿披露风险仍然存在,尽管承认道德和伦理责任。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信