Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Attitudes in the General Population Towards Hemi-Craniectomy for Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) Infarction. A Population-Based Survey

  • Ethical Matters
  • Published:
Neurocritical Care Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Decompressive hemicraniectomy reduces mortality after space-occupying MCA infarction. Data on the general public’s opinion toward interventions that can save lives but leave the survivors impaired are lacking.

Methods

In this population-based epidemiological study in a German city, we surveyed 312 adults in a telephone interview. Here, we presented a scenario of a space-occupying MCA infarct. We evaluated probands’ attitude toward decompressive surgery in general, and toward outcome scenarios according to Rankin scale (RS) definitions.

Results

312 persons (157 women, 52 ± 20 years) were interviewed. 58 persons had difficulty comprehending the proposed scenario, most of them being of advanced age (79 ± 5 years). From the remaining 254 responders 5 (2%) persons favoured surgical intervention, 149 (58%) were undecided, and 100 (39%) were opposed to surgery. The number of individuals opting for surgery rose in scenarios with a better outcome: If very severe impairment was anticipated (RS 5), only 3 (1%) persons favored surgery. With severe (RS 4), moderate (RS3), and slight impairment (RS2) the numbers were at 16 (6%), 60 (24%), and 161 (63%), respectively. We found no association with age, sex, religion, education, self-estimated health status, or marital status.

Conclusions

Explaining complex medical situations to laypersons poses a major problem, particularly to those of old age. Only a minority favors life-saving medical interventions if survival is associated with deficits of unpredictable degree. The majority of persons does not favor intervention even if only moderate impairment is anticipated. Decompressive surgery may in fact be against the values of many individuals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vahedi K, Hofmeijer J, Juettler E, et al. Early decompressive surgery in malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery: a pooled analysis of three randomised controlled trials. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6:215–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kakar V, Nagaria J, John Kirkpatrick P. The current status of decompressive craniectomy. Br J Neurosurg. 2009;23:147–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hofmeijer J, Kappelle LJ, Algra A, et al. Surgical decompression for space-occupying cerebral infarction (the Hemicraniectomy After Middle Cerebral Artery infarction with Life-threatening Edema Trial [HAMLET]): a multicentre, open, randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:326–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Samsa GP, Matchar DB, Goldstein L, et al. Utilities for major stroke: results from a survey of preferences among persons at increased risk for stroke. Am Heart J. 1998;136:703–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Statistical Yearbook 2010 for the Federal Republic of Germany. Federal Statistical Office. Wiesbaden, 2010. www.destatis.de. Accessed 21 Sept 2011.

  6. Nakagawa K, Bianchi MT, Nakagawa SS, et al. Aggressive care after a massive stroke in young patients: is that what they want? Neurocrit Care. 2010;13:118–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants’ understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004;292:1593–601.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Eran A, Erdmann E, Er F. Informed consent prior to coronary angiography in a real world scenario: what do patients remember? PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e15164. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015164.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sugarman J, McCrory DC, Hubal RC. Getting meaningful informed consent from older adults: a structured literature review of empirical research. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998;46:517–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Huttner HB, Schwab S. Malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: clinical characteristics, treatment strategies, and future perspectives. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:949–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, et al. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988;19:604–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Puetz V, Campos CR, Eliasziw M, et al. Assessing the benefits of hemicraniectomy: what is a favourable outcome? Lancet Neurol. 2007;6:580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Neudert C, Wasner M, Borasio GD. Individual quality of life is not correlated with health-related quality of life or physical function in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Palliat Med. 2004;7:551–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bruno M-A, Bernheim J, Ledoux D, et al. A survey on self-assessed well being in a cohort of chronic locked-in syndrome patients: happy majority, miserable minority. BMJ Open. 2011;1:e000039. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2010-000039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. von Steinbuechel N, Richter S, Morawetz C, et al. Assessment of subjective health and health-related quality of life in persons with acquired or degenerative brain injury. Curr Opin Neurol. 2005;18:681–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Owolabi MO. What are the consistent predictors of generic and specific post-stroke health-related quality of life? Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010;29:105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson JT, Hareendran A, Hendry A, et al. Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale across multiple raters: benefits of a structured interview. Stroke. 2005;36:777–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhao H, Collier JM, Quah DM, et al. The modified Rankin Scale in acute stroke has good inter-rater-reliability but questionable validity. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010;29:188–193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Larach DR, Larach DB, Larach MG. A life worth living: seven years after craniectomy. Neurocrit Care. 2009;11:106–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kiphuth IC, Kohrmann M, Lichy C, et al. Hemicraniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: retrospective consent to decompressive surgery depends on functional long-term outcome. Neurocrit Care. 2010;13:380–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Malmivaara K, Ohman J, Kivisaari R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy in non-traumatic neurological emergencies. Eur J Neurol. 2011;18:402–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vahedi K, Benoist L, Kurtz A, et al. Quality of life after decompressive craniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76:1181–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Skoglund TS, Eriksson-Ritzen C, Sorbo A, et al. Health status and life satisfaction after decompressive craniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction. Acta Neurol Scand. 2008;117:305–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Buchanan KM, Elias LJ, Goplen GB. Differing perspectives on outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage: the patient, the relative, the neurosurgeon. Neurosurgery. 2000;46:831–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Rothwell PM, Slattery J, Warlow CP. A systematic review of the risks of stroke and death due to endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Stroke. 1996;27:260–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Novick G. Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Res Nurs Health. 2008;31:391–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Feveile H, Olsen O, Hogh A. A randomized trial of mailed questionnaires versus telephone interviews: response patterns in a survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith EM. Telephone interviewing in healthcare research: a summary of the evidence. Nurse Res. 2005;12:32–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bowling A. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. J Public Health (Oxf). 2005;27:281–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim/Heidelberg University, Square J 5, 68159, Mannheim, Germany

    Anne Klein, Christine Kuehner & Stefan Schwarz

  2. Research Group Longitudinal and Intervention Research, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim/Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany

    Christine Kuehner

Authors
  1. Anne Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christine Kuehner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefan Schwarz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Schwarz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klein, A., Kuehner, C. & Schwarz, S. Attitudes in the General Population Towards Hemi-Craniectomy for Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) Infarction. A Population-Based Survey. Neurocrit Care 16, 456–461 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-012-9677-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-012-9677-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation