Stress from Uncertainty from Graduation to Retirement—A Population-Based Study of Swiss Physicians

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty shapes many decisions made by physicians everyday. Uncertainty and physicians' inability to handle it may result in substandard care and unexplained variations in patterns of care. OBJECTIVE: To describe socio-demographic and professional characteristics of reactions to uncertainty among physicians from all specialties, including physicians in training. DESIGN: Cross-sectional postal survey. PARTICIPANT: All physicians practicing in Geneva, Switzerland (n = 1,994). MEASUREMENT: Reaction to medical care uncertainty was measured with the Anxiety Due to Uncertainty and Concern About Bad Outcomes scales. The questionnaire also included items about professional characteristics and work-related satisfaction scales. RESULTS: After the first mailing and two reminders, 1,184 physicians responded to the survey. In univariate analysis, women, junior physicians, surgical specialists, generalist physicians, and physicians with lower workloads had higher scores in both scales. In multivariate models, sex, medical specialty, and workload remained significantly associated with both scales, whereas clinical experience remained associated only with concern about bad outcomes. Higher levels of anxiety due to uncertainty were associated with lower scores of work-related satisfaction, while higher levels of concern about bad outcomes were associated with lower satisfaction scores for patient care, personal rewards, professional relations, and general satisfaction, but not for work-related burden or satisfaction with income-prestige. The negative effect of anxiety due to uncertainty on work-related satisfaction was more important for physicians in training. CONCLUSION: Physicians' reactions to uncertainty in medical care were associated with several dimensions of work-related satisfaction. Physicians in training experienced the greatest impact of anxiety due to uncertainty on their work-related satisfaction. Incorporating strategies to deal with uncertainty into residency training may be usefu

Doctors and Patients' Susceptibility to Framing Bias: A Randomized Trial

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Framing of risk influences the perceptions of treatment benefit. OBJECTIVE: To determine which risk framing format corresponds best to comprehensive multi-faceted information, and to compare framing bias in doctors and in patients. DESIGN: Randomized mail surveys. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand four hundred and thirty-one doctors (56% response rate) and 1121 recently hospitalized patients (65% response rate). INTERVENTION: Respondents were asked to interpret the results of a hypothetical clinical trial comparing an old and a new drug. They were randomly assigned to the following framing formats: absolute survival (new drug: 96% versus old drug: 94%), absolute mortality (4% versus 6%), relative mortality reduction (reduction by a third) or all three (fully informed condition). The new drug was reported to cause more side-effects. MAIN MEASURE: Rating of the new drug as more effective than the old drug. RESULTS: The proportions of doctors who rated the new drug as more effective varied by risk presentation format (abolute survival 51.8%, absolute mortality 68.3%, relative mortality reduction 93.8%, and fully informed condition 69.8%, p  0.1). In comparison to the fully informed condition, the odds ratio of greater perceived effectiveness was 0.45 for absolute survival (p < 0.001), 0.89 for absolute mortality (p = 0.29), and 4.40 for relative mortality reduction (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Framing bias affects doctors and patients similarly. Describing clinical trial results as absolute risks is the least biased format, for both doctors and patients. Presenting several risk formats (on both absolute and relative scales) should be encourage