Helmholtz Instituut, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, NL-3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands
E-mail: r.kessels{at}fss.uu.nl
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Clearly, memory for medical information is a prerequisite for good adherence to recommended treatment. Ley's3 model on effective communication in medical practice (see Figure 1) stresses the importance of memory next to factors such as the understanding of information and satisfaction with the treatment. 40-80% of medical information provided by healthcare practitioners is forgotten immediately. The greater the amount of information presented, the lower the proportion correctly recalled;4 furthermore, almost half of the information that is remembered is incorrect.5 For the forgetting of information there are three basic types of explanationfirst, factors related to the clinician, such as use of difficult medical terminology; second, the mode of information (e.g. spoken versus written); and, third, factors related to the patient, such as low education or specific expectations.6 Here, I discuss only the second and third, since the communication skills of clinicians have been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere.7,8
|
| AGE-RELATED MEMORY FUNCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Why should older adults recall less medical information than young? Although this can be the consequence of age-related cognitive impairments (e.g. in working memory), another possible explanation is an impaired capacity to deal with unstructured information. That is, older people might have difficulty structuring the information for recollection at a later time. This hypothesis was examined by showing young and old adults videos about osteoarthritis, a condition that can affect both age groups.4 Two kinds of presentation were testedeither organized (i.e. in a logical order from test results to treatment consequences) or non-organized. Non-organized presentation of medical information is probably more in line with everyday clinical practice, in which the diagnosis and treatment options tend to emerge from a series of investigations reported to the patient at various times. The results of the study were intriguing: although the young adults outperformed the old immediately after the presentation, no group differences were found in amount of information remembered at one week or one month; moreover, the mode of presentation, organized or unorganized, made no difference to memory performance.
Others12 have suggested that it is not the organization of the material that is crucial in age-related memory function, but the extent to which the information is consistent with previously acquired knowledge and beliefs. There is indeed evidence for thisRice and Okun13 found that, among older readers, medical information that confirmed existing beliefs was better remembered than information contradicting these beliefs. The acquisition of totally new information tends to be easier than correction of preexisting knowledge, a phenomenon that is explicable in terms of cognitive schemas. A schema is a personal theory formed by the individual over the years about a disease or disorder, and in many cases it will embrace misconceptions. New information that is inconsistent with the schema tends to be misinterpreted or forgotten; and patients with chronic medical conditions often have elaborate schemas about their illness. Evidence for the influence of schemas comes from a study by Okun and Rice:14 they found that, both in a group with osteoarthritis and in healthy controls, disconfirming information was recalled less accurately than confirming information; furthermore, recall was worse when the medical information was related to the participant's own illness and thus had personal relevance.
In sum, the ageing process engenders difficulty in encoding and subsequently remembering medical information, especially that which contradicts preexisting beliefs. Memory also fades more rapidly. A practical implication is that, especially in old people, clinicians should not leave a long gap between providing information and seeking the patient's decision.4
| ANXIETY AND DISTRESS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
State dependency refers to the phenomenon whereby the amount of information recalled depends on congruity between the physical or psychological state during the learning phase and the state during the recall phase. Thus, if information is given while the patient is highly stressed, with stress-related physiological phenomena such as tachycardia, the memory performance will be best if he or she is in the same state during the recall phase.16 The fact that advice on treatment is commonly given in the stressful environment of a clinic yet is applicable in the more relaxed home environment, may partly explain why patients forget how many pills to take or the date of their next appointment.
Research on the recall of medical information supports this notion. For example, women at risk for breast cancer remembered less information if the physician made a worried impression (thus increasing the level of distress).17 Furthermore, in a group of outpatients anxiety and recall were related in an inversely U-shaped curvilinear manner: both very high and very low anxiety hamper eventual memory performance, moderate anxiety being best.6 Clinicians must therefore take account of the distressing features of the information to be given. If this cannot be mitigatedfor example, in the case of a bad-news interviewprovision of an audiotape of the interview will enable the patient to go over the information at home, when anxiety and distress have lessened, and absorb it properly.18,19
| PERCEIVED IMPORTANCE OF THE INFORMATION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The organization or categorization of the statements is another influence on memory performance. Information can be categorized in two waysimplicitly or explicitly. As mentioned earlier, implicit categorizationi.e. merely presenting the statements in a logical orderdoes not improve recall. By contrast, explicit categorization does increase recall of medical information. The difference is that categories of information are specified in advance. 6 A standard five-category set begins by telling the patient what is wrong, then what tests will be performed, then what is expected to happen, then which treatment will be needed and finally what the patient can do to help himself or herself.
| SPOKEN, WRITTEN OR NON-VERBAL? |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In addition to verbal or visual communication methods technological aids are available, such as videotaped instructions or computer-aided information systems. Research on these new methods has so far yielded mixed results. A study in dental practice indicated that multi-media information had only a slightly better short-term effect than written information, 25 and patients receiving chemotherapy preferred direct communication with a clinician to watching a videotape. 26 Technological aids should be examined in more detail, but on existing evidence a combination of spoken and written or visual information is best. 21
| CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J.E. Thistlethwaite, R. Ajjawi, and P. Aslani The decision to prescribe: influences and choice InnovAiT, April 1, 2010; 3(4): 237 - 243. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. W. Watson and B. McKinstry A systematic review of interventions to improve recall of medical advice in healthcare consultations J R Soc Med, June 1, 2009; 102(6): 235 - 243. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.M. Mourad, R.P.M.G. Hermens, T. Cox-Witbraad, R.P.T.M. Grol, W.L.D.M. Nelen, and J.A.M. Kremer Information provision in fertility care: a call for improvement Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2009; 24(6): 1420 - 1426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Buetow, L. Kiata, T. Liew, T. Kenealy, S. Dovey, and G. Elwyn Patient Error: A Preliminary Taxonomy Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2009; 7(3): 223 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. C. Winkler, S. Reiter-Theil, D. Lange-Riess, N. Schmahl-Menges, and W. Hiddemann Patient Involvement in Decisions to Limit Treatment: The Crucial Role of Agreement Between Physician and Patient J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2009; 27(13): 2225 - 2230. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. L. Oliffe, B. J. Davison, T. Pickles, and L. Mroz The Self-Management of Uncertainty Among Men Undertaking Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Qual Health Res, April 1, 2009; 19(4): 432 - 443. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Jansen, P. N. Butow, J. C.M. van Weert, S. van Dulmen, R. J. Devine, T. J. Heeren, J. M. Bensing, and M. H.N. Tattersall Does Age Really Matter? Recall of Information Presented to Newly Referred Patients With Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., November 20, 2008; 26(33): 5450 - 5457. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.M. Mourad, W.L.D.M. Nelen, R.P.M.G. Hermens, L.F. Bancsi, D.D.M. Braat, G.A. Zielhuis, R.P.T.M. Grol, and J.A.M. Kremer Variation in subfertility care measured by guideline-based performance indicators Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2008; 23(11): 2493 - 2500. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Asplin Telling the parents: newborn blood spot screening for cystic fibrosis J R Soc Med, July 1, 2008; 101(Supplement_1): 28 - 30. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Veerbeek, A. van der Heide, E. de Vogel-Voogt, R. de Bakker, C. C. D. van der Rijt, S. J. Swart, P. J. van der Maas, and L. van Zuylen Using the LCP: Bereaved Relatives' Assessments of Communication and Bereavement American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, June 1, 2008; 25(3): 207 - 214. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Jansen, J. van Weert, N. van der Meulen, S. van Dulmen, T. Heeren, and J. Bensing Recall in Older Cancer Patients: Measuring Memory for Medical Information Gerontologist, April 1, 2008; 48(2): 149 - 157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C Eccleston Managing chronic pain in children: the challenge of delivering chronic care in a "modernising" healthcare system Arch. Dis. Child., April 1, 2005; 90(4): 332 - 333. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. E Ferner Is concordance the primrose path to health? BMJ, October 11, 2003; 327(7419): 821 - 822. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Shankar Patients' memory for medical information J R Soc Med, October 1, 2003; 96(10): 520 - 520. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. M. Chow Information recall by patients J R Soc Med, July 1, 2003; 96(7): 370 - 370. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||