By Edward J. Thomas –
Information undoubtedly is power. But the equation changes if someone doesn’t understand the information they’re holding. This apparently is the case with medical records, as they often cause patient anxiety—and it is causing problems.
Since April 2021, all medical test results are required to be released to patients electronically as soon as they become available. This means that patients often have the chance to see them before their doctors review the findings.
Unfortunately, immediate access for patients doesn’t always mean they understand the results. These reports, after all, are not written for untrained patients to understand. As a result, patients can become confused, misinterpreting the results and generating harmful anxiety, according to several pathologists and other doctors.
These concerns led these physicians to consider whether test result reports need to be more patient-friendly. The findings showed that easier-to-understand reports improved understanding and lowered needless concerns.
“A standard pathology report is written by a pathologist for a clinical specialist like a surgeon or a cancer doctor or for other pathologists to read,” explained Dr. Cathryn Lapedis of the Department of Pathology at the University of Michigan Health.
Lapedis and her colleagues responded to these concerns by testing whether people could understand standard pathology reports and whether a patient-centered report might improve patient understanding.
“A patient-centered pathology report gives important information on the patient’s diagnosis in a clear format that minimizes medical terminology,” she explained. “For example, a standard pathology report will include a term like prostatic adenocarcinoma, but the patient-centered report will simply call it prostate cancer.”
For the study, the team recruited 2,238 adults, aged 55 to 84, who had a prostate but no history of prostate cancer. Participants were provided with a hypothetical scenario in which they were seeking care due to troubling urinary symptoms, received a biopsy and then would receive results from that test through their patient portal.
Participants saw one of three types of reports: a standard university report identical to the format used at the University of Michigan, a standard VA report identical to the format used at the VA Ann Arbor Health System or a patient-centered pathology report.
Study participants were asked to identify their diagnosis and their risk level. They were also asked to report their level of worry based on the results.
“We found that most people cannot get basic information—like whether or not they have prostate cancer from standard pathology reports. For example, in our participants reviewing the standard University report, only 39 percent could accurately identify that the report showed cancer,” said Lapedis.
However, 93 percent of those who received the patient-centered pathology report accurately identified that the report showed prostate cancer. Participants’ level of worry was more closely associated with their risk level with the patient-centered report than the standard reports.
“We recommend that hospital systems consider including patient-centered pathology reports with standard reports to improve patient understanding,” she added.
Until then, the research team’s advice to patients about medical test results is to talk with their clinicians about what words to look for in their reports even before having the test.
