Potential patient harms from misinterpretation of publically reported surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the general public interprets surgical complication rates presented from a publicly available online surgical-rating website. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: An in-person electronic survey was administered at the local State Fair to a convenience sample. Participants were presented with a representative output from an online surgeon-rating website and were asked to choose from three statistically equivalent surgeons for a hypothetical medical decision. We then suggested that their insurance company would only cover one surgeon and probed their willingness to pay to switch surgeons for a small chance of lowering the risk of a complication (0.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8.1% to 9.5%, P = 0.9). We quantified the characteristics of those willing to switch, the degree of misinterpretation, and the subsequent potential patient harms. RESULTS: There were 343 completed responses. When presented with a hypothetical healthcare decision, most participants (n = 209, 61%) said they were willing to pay out-of-pocket expenses to switch to a statistically equivalent surgeon. Those who were willing to pay to switch surgeons were more likely to be older (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03), poorer (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.07-3.11), previously had cancer (OR 5.9, 95% CI 1.9-25), and misinterpreted the data (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.87-4.96). Those who were willing to pay out-of-pocket expenses were more inaccurate in their estimation of surgeon complication rates (mean estimate 34.0% vs 8.9%, P < 0.001, correct rate = 3.6%), and on average were willing to pay $6 494 (95% CI 4 108-8 880). CONCLUSION: Understanding of a publicly reported surgical-complication website is often prone to misinterpretation by the general population and may lead to patient harm from a financial aspect.

Prostate Cancer Survival Estimates by the General Public Using Unrestricted Internet Searches and Online Nomograms.

BACKGROUND: Patient understanding of cancer-associated risk influences treatment preferences and is vital for making informed treatment decisions. Although patients traditionally relied on physician visits for cancer information, most adults now use the Internet as a primary source of health information. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether US adults can accurately estimate survival for hypothetical prostate cancer patients using unrestricted Internet searching and an online nomogram. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Adults were recruited at the Minnesota State Fair. Participants were shown a pathology report for a prostatectomy cancer specimen and asked to estimate the patient's 15-yr survival using an unrestricted Internet search. Participants were then asked to re-estimate using a freely available, validated prostate cancer nomogram. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Participants' answers were compared to a "reference" estimate and a "ballpark" estimate of ±10 percentage points of the "reference" value. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 129 participants met the inclusion criteria and generated complete responses. Only 12% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.8-19.2%) were within the "ballpark" estimate when using unrestricted Internet searching for overall survival estimates. 23% (95% CI 16.8-31.3%) correctly used the nomogram and 51% (95% CI 42.6-59.6%) estimated within the "ballpark" when using the nomogram. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an unrestricted Internet search often yields inaccurate estimations of life expectancy, while estimations significantly improve with nomogram use. Physicians should educate and guide patients towards credible online health resources, facilitate their effective use, and engage in discussion with patients regarding the utility of this information. PATIENT SUMMARY: The general public finds it difficult to estimate prostate cancer survival using unrestricted Internet searches. Most patients would benefit from Internet guidance from their clinicians to better understand prostate cancer pathology reports.