Background: It is important for the physician and the patient to have a mutual understanding of the possible consequences of different treatment alternatives in order to achieve a partnership in decision-making.
Objective: The aim of this study was to explore to which degree first-time consultations for discussion of climacteric discomfort achieved shared understanding of the risks and benefits associated with hormone therapy in the menopausal transition.
Methods: Analysis of structure and content of transcribed consultations (n = 20), and follow-up interviews of the women (n = 19 pairs of consultations and interviews), from first-time visits for discussion of climacteric discomfort and/or HT with five physicians at three different outpatient clinics of gynecology in Sweden.
Results: Four distinctively different interpretations of risk, depending on whether or not benefits were discussed in the same context, emerged from the analysis. On average, five advantages (range 0-11) and two (0-3) disadvantages were mentioned during the consultations. In the interviews, the women expressed on average four advantages (0-7) and one disadvantage (0-3). There were major variations between advantages and disadvantages expressed in the consultation and the following interview.
Conclusion: Even though the consultations scored high in patient involvement, the information in most consultations was not structured in a way that made it possible to achieve a shared or an informed decision-taking.