The Variability of Patient Preferences

Bernstein, Joseph

doi:10.1007/s11999-011-2239-6

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many orthopaedic interventions are invoked because of variable patient preferences [7] and not absolute physiological data. It is therefore not surprising to discover that certain procedures are likewise indicated for some, but not all, seemingly similar patients.…”

Section: N 2012 the American Board Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not the Last Word: Choosing Wisely

Bernstein

2015

Clin Orthop Relat Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: N 2012 the American Board Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not the Last Word: Choosing Wisely

Bernstein

2015

Clin Orthop Relat Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A surgeon practicing evidence-based medicine cannot impose his or her values on the patient, but rather must attempt ( 21 ) to discern the patient’s own values. This exercise is not easy, to be sure, as patients may not be able to express their values clearly ( 22 ), or for that matter, even hold consistent values. It may be, for example, that ORIF is deemed preferable when the patient considers its potential for success, but when the choice is framed ( 23 ) in terms of avoiding complications, a natural aversion for avoiding loss may make the arthroplasty option more appealing.…”

Section: Randomized Controlled Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying Evidence-Based Medicine Principles to Hip Fracture Management

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone has the capacity to regenerate and not scar after injury – sometimes leaving behind no evidence at all of a prior fracture. As surgeons capable of facilitating such healing, it becomes our responsibility to help choose a treatment that minimizes functional deficits and residual symptoms. And in the case of the geriatric hip fracture, we have seen the accumulation of a vast amount of evidence to help guide us. The best method we currently have for selecting treatment plans is by the practice of evidence-based medicine. According to the now accepted hierarchy, the best is called Level I evidence (e.g., well performed randomized controlled trials) – but this evidence is best only if it is available and appropriate. Lower forms of accepted evidence include cohort studies, case control studies, case series, and case reports, and last, expert opinion – all of which can be potentially instructive. The hallmark of evidence-based treatment is not so much the reliance on evidence in general, but to use the best available evidence relative to the particular patient, the clinical setting and surgeon experience. Correctly applied, varying forms of evidence each have a role in aiding surgeons offer appropriate care for their patients – to help them best fix the fracture.

show abstract

“…Letter to the Editor: Routine MRI Among Patients With a Suspected Scaphoid Fracture Risks Overdiagnosis Joseph Bernstein MD 1 To the Editor, I read the study by Bulstra et al, "Routine MRI Among Patients With a Suspected Scaphoid Fracture Risks Overdiagnosis" [4], and the accompanying interview [5] with great interest. Although I often don't treat patients with this injury, I have a longstanding interest in decision analysis and the application of patient preferences in medical decision-making [2,3]. From that perspective, I drew a very different inference from the data presented.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Variability of Patient Preferences

Cited by 7 publications

References 27 publications

Not the Last Word: Choosing Wisely

Not the Last Word: Choosing Wisely

Applying Evidence-Based Medicine Principles to Hip Fracture Management

Letter to the Editor: Routine MRI Among Patients With a Suspected Scaphoid Fracture Risks Overdiagnosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About