( fractures of the tibia, low down near the ankle joint, involving the tibial weight-bearing surface):
• A construction worker requires rapid restoration of weight-bearing capacity. For this patient, a hindfoot fusion nail may be preferable. Though it limits ankle motion, it permits earlier mobilization and faster return to the job site.
• An office worker, however, may prioritize preserving ankle motion for recreational activities such as hiking or running. For them, an open reduction and internal fixation procedure may be more appropriate, even if it entails six to eight weeks of limited weight-bearing.
The anatomic injury may be the same, but the ideal treatment diverges based on the patient’ s life circumstances. Without understanding what a patient does for a living, surgeons risk recommending a plan that restores anatomy but undermines livelihood. Incorporating occupational context transforms surgical planning from a purely technical exercise into a collaborative process that safeguards both health and livelihood.
Whom do you live with at home?
Social support is one of the most powerful predictors of postoperative outcomes. Recovery from major surgery extends beyond the hospital stay; it involves navigating the daily challenges of mobility, self-care and adherence to rehabilitation. A patient’ s home environment – whom they live with, who can help with meals, medications and transportation – shapes whether recovery is smooth or fraught with setbacks.
The literature consistently affirms this point. Multiple studies demonstrate that patients with a strong support system have markedly better postoperative outcomes, including improved functional recovery, better mental health and reduced mortality, compared to those who live alone. 5-11 The presence of family or caregivers is directly linked to lower health care utilization, including reduced readmission rates and shorter lengths of stay.², ¹² In contrast, patients living alone or reporting loneliness demonstrate higher rates of depression, anxiety and poor subjective health after surgery. 10-13 Identifying patients with limited support is therefore not a peripheral consideration; it is a core component of preoperative planning. Early recognition enables interventions such as arranging visiting nurses, physical therapy at home or inpatient rehabilitation, thereby bridging the gap between surgical care and successful recovery.
Beyond the Checklist: Seeing the Whole Patient
Perhaps most importantly, asking these questions reminds us of our fundamental role as caregivers: to see our patients as complete human beings, not just as problems to be solved. This practice fundamentally shifts our perspective from treating“ the ankle fracture that came in overnight” to caring for“ the engineer who broke his ankle playing soccer and lives with his girlfriend.” It reminds us to acknowledge our patients as people with their own lives, loved ones and aspirations.
The evidence is clear: patient satisfaction depends not only on clinical outcomes but also on the quality of physician-patient interactions. Respect, empathy and clear communication are the most robust predictors of a positive patient experience, often outweighing the impact of clinical outcomes or complications. 14-16 Studies consistently show that when patients feel their doctors listen, show genuine concern and treat them with respect, their odds of reporting high satisfaction increase dramatically. 14-25 Empathic care is directly associated with faster recovery, less anxiety and better pain control.²³
Conclusion
By building our consultations around these three questions( How did you get injured? What do you do for a living? Whom do you live with at home?), we transform a simple medical evaluation into a comprehensive assessment of the whole patient. We learn to design treatment plans that are not only medically sound but also practical, compassionate and centered on the person, not just the pathology. Surgery may repair bones, but it is our empathy, attentiveness and contextual understanding that restore lives.
References
1. Bhattacharyya T, Yeon H, Harris MB. The medical-legal aspects of informed
consent in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87( 11): 2395-2400.
doi: 10.2106 / JBJS. D. 02877
2. Tarantino U, Giai Via A, Macrì E, et al. Professional liability in orthopaedics
and traumatology in Italy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471( 10): 3349-3357.
doi: 10.1007 / s11999-013-3165-6
3. Lyons JM, Martinez JA, O’ Leary JP. Medical malpractice matters: medical record M & Ms. J Surg Educ. 2009; 66( 2): 113-117. doi: 10.1016 / j.
jsurg. 2008.12.002
4. Gould MT, Langworthy MJ, Santore R, Provencher MT. An analysis of orthopaedic liability in the acute care setting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;( 407): 59-
66. doi: 10.1097 / 00003086-200302000-00011
5. Sokas CM, Hu FY, Dalton MK, et al. Understanding the role of informal
caregivers in postoperative care transitions for older patients. J Am Geriatr
Soc. 2022; 70( 1): 208-217. doi: 10.1111 / jgs. 17507
6. Bucher BT, Yang M, Richards Steed R, et al. Geographic proximity of family
members and healthcare utilization after complex surgical procedures. Ann
Surg. 2022; 276( 4): 720-731. doi: 10.1097 / SLA. 0000000000005584 7. Cardillo C, Katzman JL, Lawrence KW, et al. Are patients’ relationships to
their primary contacts associated with postoperative outcomes after total joint arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty. 2025; 40( 6): 1439-1444. doi: 10.1016 / j.
arth. 2024.11.036
8. Lage DE, Jernigan MC, Chang Y, et al. Living alone and discharge to skilled
nursing facility care after hospitalization in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66( 1): 100-105. doi: 10.1111 / jgs. 15150
9. Shah SJ, Fang MC, Wannier SR, Steinman MA, Covinsky KE. Association of
social support with functional outcomes in older adults who live alone. JAMA
Intern Med. 2022; 182( 1): 26-32. doi: 10.1001 / jamainternmed. 2021.6588
10. Krampe H, Barth-Zoubairi A, Schnell T, et al. Social relationship factors,
preoperative depression, and hospital length of stay in surgical patients. Int
J Behav Med. 2018; 25( 6): 658-668. doi: 10.1007 / s12529-018-9738-8 11. Okkonen E, Vanhanen H. Family support, living alone, and subjective health
of a patient in connection with a coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart Lung.
2006; 35( 4): 234-244. doi: 10.1016 / j. hrtlng. 2005.11.002
12. Kellsey DC. The anatomy of orthopaedic malpractice. A study of two hundred
and fifty cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975; 57( 7): 1013-1018.
13. Berian JR, Mohanty S, Ko CY, Rosenthal RA, Robinson TN. Association
of loss of independence with readmission and death after discharge in older patients after surgical procedures. JAMA Surg. 2016; 151( 9): e161689.
doi: 10.1001 / jamasurg. 2016.1689
14. Levinson W, Gorawara-Bhat R, Lamb J. A study of patient clues and physician
responses in primary care and surgical settings. JAMA. 2000; 284( 8): 1021-
1027. doi: 10.1001 / jama. 284.8.1021
15. Kahn SA, Iannuzzi JC, Stassen NA, Bankey PE, Gestring M. Measuring
satisfaction: factors that drive Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare
( continued on page 28)
October 2025 27