Medical maximizing-minimizing preferences and health beliefs associated with emergency department patients' intentions to take a cardiac stress test after receiving information about testing

IF 1 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Heart and Mind Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.4103/hm.hm_48_21
Andrew J. Foy, A. Bucher, L. V. Van Scoy, Laura D. Scherer
{"title":"Medical maximizing-minimizing preferences and health beliefs associated with emergency department patients' intentions to take a cardiac stress test after receiving information about testing","authors":"Andrew J. Foy, A. Bucher, L. V. Van Scoy, Laura D. Scherer","doi":"10.4103/hm.hm_48_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale (MMS) has been validated to predict preferences for health-care service use on hypothetical vignettes in nonclinical cohorts. Using mixed methods, we sought to determine whether it would predict preferences for cardiac stress testing in a cohort of emergency department (ED) patients with low-risk chest pain within the context of the Health Belief Model (HBM). Design: Patients who met the definition for low-risk chest pain and who were eligible to take a cardiac stress test before being discharged from the hospital were recruited to participate. Each participant provided demographic information and completed the MMS-10 paper-and-pencil scale. They then watched a 7-min informational video on an iPad tablet that provided information about the condition of “low-risk chest pain” and the probabilities of results and outcomes following a cardiac stress test. After the video, participants answered a one-question survey on their intention-to-take (ITT) a cardiac stress test or not and were then interviewed about factors that influenced their decision-making. Interviews were interpreted using a HBM lens. Results: Sixty participants were enrolled in the study who were between the ages of 29 and 80 years with a mean age of 53 (± 10.8); 58% were women and 90% were white. The mean MMS score was 4.6 (± 0.8) and ranged from 2.6 to 6.8. Minimizers accounted for 25% (n = 15) of the cohort while maximizers accounted for 75% (n = 45). MMS scores followed a normal distribution and were found to be mildly correlated with ITT scores (r = 0.25; P = 0.051). The mean ITT scores for individuals with MMS scores in the 1st and 4th quartiles were 3.9 ± 2.2 and 5.9 ± 1.7, respectively. After watching the informational video, individuals' perceptions related to the: (1) low threat posed by the condition, (2) low utility (low benefits + significant barriers) of taking a cardiac stress test, and (3) high benefits of taking a cardiac stress test were all strongly associated with ITT scores in a directional manner. No direct connection was found between minimizer-maximizer preferences and health beliefs after watching the informational video. This may have been due to sample size and underrepresentation of minimizers in the cohort. Conclusions: MMS and health beliefs predicted preferences for cardiac stress testing in ED patients with low-risk chest pain after viewing an informational video on the topic. However, we did not find direct evidence that the relationship between MMS and decision-making is mediated through the formation of perceptions of threat and utility consistent with the HBM. More research is needed to establish this connection and understand how framing of information in the health-care space may interact with stable personality traits to influence decision-making.","PeriodicalId":34653,"journal":{"name":"Heart and Mind","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart and Mind","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/hm.hm_48_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale (MMS) has been validated to predict preferences for health-care service use on hypothetical vignettes in nonclinical cohorts. Using mixed methods, we sought to determine whether it would predict preferences for cardiac stress testing in a cohort of emergency department (ED) patients with low-risk chest pain within the context of the Health Belief Model (HBM). Design: Patients who met the definition for low-risk chest pain and who were eligible to take a cardiac stress test before being discharged from the hospital were recruited to participate. Each participant provided demographic information and completed the MMS-10 paper-and-pencil scale. They then watched a 7-min informational video on an iPad tablet that provided information about the condition of “low-risk chest pain” and the probabilities of results and outcomes following a cardiac stress test. After the video, participants answered a one-question survey on their intention-to-take (ITT) a cardiac stress test or not and were then interviewed about factors that influenced their decision-making. Interviews were interpreted using a HBM lens. Results: Sixty participants were enrolled in the study who were between the ages of 29 and 80 years with a mean age of 53 (± 10.8); 58% were women and 90% were white. The mean MMS score was 4.6 (± 0.8) and ranged from 2.6 to 6.8. Minimizers accounted for 25% (n = 15) of the cohort while maximizers accounted for 75% (n = 45). MMS scores followed a normal distribution and were found to be mildly correlated with ITT scores (r = 0.25; P = 0.051). The mean ITT scores for individuals with MMS scores in the 1st and 4th quartiles were 3.9 ± 2.2 and 5.9 ± 1.7, respectively. After watching the informational video, individuals' perceptions related to the: (1) low threat posed by the condition, (2) low utility (low benefits + significant barriers) of taking a cardiac stress test, and (3) high benefits of taking a cardiac stress test were all strongly associated with ITT scores in a directional manner. No direct connection was found between minimizer-maximizer preferences and health beliefs after watching the informational video. This may have been due to sample size and underrepresentation of minimizers in the cohort. Conclusions: MMS and health beliefs predicted preferences for cardiac stress testing in ED patients with low-risk chest pain after viewing an informational video on the topic. However, we did not find direct evidence that the relationship between MMS and decision-making is mediated through the formation of perceptions of threat and utility consistent with the HBM. More research is needed to establish this connection and understand how framing of information in the health-care space may interact with stable personality traits to influence decision-making.
医疗最大化-最小化偏好和健康信念与急诊科患者在收到测试信息后接受心脏负荷测试的意图相关
目的:医学最大化-最小化量表(MMS)已被验证用于预测非临床队列中假设小插曲对医疗服务使用的偏好。使用混合方法,我们试图确定它是否能在健康信念模型(HBM)的背景下预测急诊科(ED)低风险胸痛患者的心脏压力测试偏好。设计:招募符合低风险胸痛定义并有资格在出院前进行心脏压力测试的患者参加。每个参与者都提供了人口统计信息,并完成了MMS-10纸笔量表。然后,他们在iPad平板电脑上观看了一段7分钟的信息视频,视频提供了关于“低风险胸痛”的情况以及心脏压力测试后结果和结果的概率。视频结束后,参与者回答了一个关于他们是否打算进行心脏压力测试(ITT)的一个问题调查,然后就影响他们决策的因素进行了采访。访谈采用HBM镜头进行解读。结果:60名参与者年龄在29岁至80岁之间,平均年龄为53岁(±10.8);58%为女性,90%为白人。平均MMS评分为4.6(±0.8),范围为2.6至6.8。最小化者占队列的25%(n=15),而最大化者占75%(n=45)。MMS得分呈正态分布,与ITT得分轻度相关(r=0.25;P=0.051)。MMS得分在第一和第四分位数的个体的平均ITT得分分别为3.9±2.2和5.9±1.7。在观看了信息视频后,个体对以下方面的感知:(1)疾病造成的低威胁,(2)进行心脏压力测试的低效用(低益处+显著障碍),以及(3)进行心脏应激测试的高益处,都与ITT分数有方向性强相关。在观看信息视频后,未发现最小化者-最大化者偏好与健康信念之间存在直接联系。这可能是由于样本量和队列中最小者的代表性不足。结论:MMS和健康信念预测了低风险胸痛ED患者在观看该主题的信息视频后对心脏压力测试的偏好。然而,我们没有发现直接证据表明MMS和决策之间的关系是通过形成与HBM一致的威胁和效用感知来调节的。需要更多的研究来建立这种联系,并了解医疗保健空间中的信息框架如何与稳定的人格特征相互作用,从而影响决策。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
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