Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care

Background Medical maximizing-minimizing (MM) preferences predict a variety of medical decisions. We tested whether informing people about their MM preferences and asking them to reflect on the pros and cons of that preference would improve medical decisions when clear clinical recommendations exist...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, Victoria A. Shaffer, Laura D. Scherer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2021-01-01
Series:MDM Policy & Practice
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468320987498
id doaj-5e2e6b6c0bd843989c3be69ffadd6ce9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5e2e6b6c0bd843989c3be69ffadd6ce92021-09-09T12:33:20ZengSAGE PublishingMDM Policy & Practice2381-46832021-01-01610.1177/2381468320987498Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit CareBrian J. Zikmund-FisherVictoria A. ShafferLaura D. SchererBackground Medical maximizing-minimizing (MM) preferences predict a variety of medical decisions. We tested whether informing people about their MM preferences and asking them to reflect on the pros and cons of that preference would improve medical decisions when clear clinical recommendations exist. Methods We surveyed 1219 US adults age 40+ that were sampled to ensure a 50%/50% distribution of medical maximizers versus minimizers. Participants either received no MM feedback (Control) or received feedback about their MM type and instructions to reflect on how that MM type can be helpful in some circumstances and problematic in others (Reflection). All participants then completed five hypothetical decision scenarios regarding low-value care services (e.g., head computed tomography scan for mild concussion) and three about high-value care (e.g., flu vaccination). Results There were no significant differences between the Control and Reflection groups in five of eight scenarios. In three scenarios (two low-benefit and one high-benefit), we observed small effects in the nonhypothesized direction for the MM subgroup least likely to follow the recommendation (e.g., maximizers in the Reflection group were more likely to request low-benefit care). Conclusions Asking people to reflect on their MM preferences may be a counterproductive strategy for optimizing patient decision making around quality of care.https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468320987498
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
Victoria A. Shaffer
Laura D. Scherer
spellingShingle Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
Victoria A. Shaffer
Laura D. Scherer
Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
MDM Policy & Practice
author_facet Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
Victoria A. Shaffer
Laura D. Scherer
author_sort Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
title Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
title_short Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
title_full Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
title_fullStr Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
title_full_unstemmed Promoting Reflection on Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Preferences May Create Undesired Effects on Decisions About Low-Benefit and High-Benefit Care
title_sort promoting reflection on medical maximizing-minimizing preferences may create undesired effects on decisions about low-benefit and high-benefit care
publisher SAGE Publishing
series MDM Policy & Practice
issn 2381-4683
publishDate 2021-01-01
description Background Medical maximizing-minimizing (MM) preferences predict a variety of medical decisions. We tested whether informing people about their MM preferences and asking them to reflect on the pros and cons of that preference would improve medical decisions when clear clinical recommendations exist. Methods We surveyed 1219 US adults age 40+ that were sampled to ensure a 50%/50% distribution of medical maximizers versus minimizers. Participants either received no MM feedback (Control) or received feedback about their MM type and instructions to reflect on how that MM type can be helpful in some circumstances and problematic in others (Reflection). All participants then completed five hypothetical decision scenarios regarding low-value care services (e.g., head computed tomography scan for mild concussion) and three about high-value care (e.g., flu vaccination). Results There were no significant differences between the Control and Reflection groups in five of eight scenarios. In three scenarios (two low-benefit and one high-benefit), we observed small effects in the nonhypothesized direction for the MM subgroup least likely to follow the recommendation (e.g., maximizers in the Reflection group were more likely to request low-benefit care). Conclusions Asking people to reflect on their MM preferences may be a counterproductive strategy for optimizing patient decision making around quality of care.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468320987498
work_keys_str_mv AT brianjzikmundfisher promotingreflectiononmedicalmaximizingminimizingpreferencesmaycreateundesiredeffectsondecisionsaboutlowbenefitandhighbenefitcare
AT victoriaashaffer promotingreflectiononmedicalmaximizingminimizingpreferencesmaycreateundesiredeffectsondecisionsaboutlowbenefitandhighbenefitcare
AT lauradscherer promotingreflectiononmedicalmaximizingminimizingpreferencesmaycreateundesiredeffectsondecisionsaboutlowbenefitandhighbenefitcare
_version_ 1717761063460536320