A qualitative study with orthopaedic surgeons on pain catastrophizing and surgical outcomes: shifting from a medical towards a biopsychosocial model of surgery

Abstract

Background: Pain catastrophizing (PC) moderates surgical outcomes and behavioural interventions are recommended to optimise post-operative results. Less is known about surgeons’ experiences of providing care and their attitudes towards the use of interventions in practice. Objective: It is therefore invaluable to understand surgeons’ views on how best to support patients who may be at risk of suboptimal recovery. Eleven surgeons and three registrar orthopaedic practitioners took part in semi-structured interviews within a hospital setting. The surgical decision-making process, views of PC and the use of behavioural interventions in surgical practice were explored. Results: Thematic analysis identified five themes: pain expressions and pain behaviours affect the surgeons’ decision-making process, when pathologies and symptoms do not match, psychological factors pertaining to unsatisfactory outcomes, a service gap in surgical care and the acceptability of using a screening tool in surgical practice to identify patients at risk of suboptimal recovery. Conclusion: Orthopaedic surgeons face challenges in identifying who is likely to reach optimal versus suboptimal outcome. Surgeons are becoming increasingly aware of patient psychological distress being detrimental to outcomes, and they support the use of behavioural interventions to optimise post-operative outcomes or stop unnecessary treatments. The surgeons accept the use of a screening tool in surgical practice with better access to support services with input from allied health professionals. A screening tool may provide great utility for identifying at risk patients, to allow for modification of surgical patients care plans.