Restructuring Illness Meaning Through the Clinical Encounter: A Process of Disruption and Coherence

Abstract Background The aim of this article is to explore preventive health dialogues in general practice in the context of a pilot study of a Danish primary preventive intervention ‘TOF’ (a Danish acronym for ‘Early Detection and Prevention’) carried out in 2016. The intervention consisted of 1) a stratification of patients into one of four groups, 2) a digital support system for both general practitioners and patients, 3) an individual digital health profile for each patient, and 4) targeted preventive services in either general practice or a municipal health center. Methods The empirical material in this study was obtained through 10 observations of preventive health dialogues conducted in general practices and 18 semi-structured interviews with patients and general practitioners. We used the concept of ‘motivational work’ as an analytical lens for understanding preventive health dialogues in general practice from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients. Results While the health dialogues in TOF sought to reveal patients’ motivations, understandings, and priorities related to health behavior, we find that the dialogues were treatment-oriented and structured around biomedical facts, numeric standards, and risk factor guidance. Overall, we find that numeric standards and quantification of motivation lessens the dialogue and interaction between General Practitioner and patient and that contextual factors relating to the intervention framework, such as a digital support system, the general practitioners’ perceptions of their professional position as well as the patients’ understanding of prevention —in an interplay—diminished the motivational work carried out in the health dialogues. Conclusion The findings show that the influence of different kinds of context adds to the complexity of prevention in the clinical encounter which help to explain why motivational work is difficult in general practice.

Download Full-text

Discussion of “I’mprovisation–Therapists’ Subjective Experience during Improvisational Moments in the Clinical Encounter”

Psychoanalytic Dialogues ◽

10.1080/10481885.2019.1614835 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 29 (3) ◽

pp. 311-320

Author(s):

Philip A. Ringstrom

Keyword(s):

Subjective Experience ◽

Clinical Encounter

Download Full-text

Observer Ratings of Shared Decision Making Do Not Match Patient Reports: An Observational Study in 5 Family Medicine Practices

Medical Decision Making ◽

10.1177/0272989x20977885 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (1) ◽

pp. 51-59

Author(s):

Gisèle Diendéré ◽

Imen Farhat ◽

Holly Witteman ◽

Ruth Ndjaboue

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Family Medicine ◽

Risk Communication ◽

Shared Decision Making ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Clinical Encounter ◽

Values Clarification ◽

Shared Decision ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical Consultations

Background Measuring shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice is important to improve the quality of health care. Measurement can be done by trained observers and by people participating in the clinical encounter, namely, patients. This study aimed to describe the correlations between patients’ and observers’ ratings of SDM using 2 validated and 2 nonvalidated SDM measures in clinical consultations. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 238 complete dyads of health professionals and patients in 5 university-affiliated family medicine clinics in Canada. Participants completed self-administered questionnaires before and after audio-recorded medical consultations. Observers rated the occurrence of SDM during medical consultations using both the validated OPTION-5 (the 5-item “observing patient involvement” score) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-observer). Patients rated SDM using both the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q9) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-patient). Results Agreement was low between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using validated OPTION-5 and SDM-Q9, respectively (ρ = 0.07; P = 0.38). Observers’ ratings using RCVC-observer were correlated to patients’ ratings using either SDM-Q9 ( rpb = −0.16; P = 0.01) or RCVC-patients ( rpb = 0.24; P = 0.03). Observers’ OPTION-5 scores and patients’ ratings using RCVC-questions were moderately correlated ( rφ = 0.33; P = 0.04). Conclusion There was moderate to no alignment between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using both validated and nonvalidated measures. This lack of strong correlation emphasizes that observer and patient perspectives are not interchangeable. When assessing the presence, absence, or extent of SDM, it is important to clearly state whose perspectives are reflected.

Download Full-text

Workplace-based assessments of entrustable professional activities in a psychiatry core clerkship: an observational study

BMC Medical Education ◽

10.1186/s12909-021-02637-4 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Severin Pinilla ◽

Alexandra Kyrou ◽

Stefan Klöppel ◽

Werner Strik ◽

Christoph Nissen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Encounter ◽

Entrustable Professional Activities ◽

Written Feedback ◽

Professional Activities ◽

Quality Feedback ◽

Observational Prospective Cohort Study ◽

Competency Based ◽

Patient’S History ◽

Indirect Supervision ◽

Clerkship Rotation

Abstract Background Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) in competency-based, undergraduate medical education (UME) have led to new formative workplace-based assessments (WBA) using entrustment-supervision scales in clerkships. We conducted an observational, prospective cohort study to explore the usefulness of a WBA designed to assess core EPAs in a psychiatry clerkship. Methods We analyzed changes in self-entrustment ratings of students and the supervisors’ ratings per EPA. Timing and frequencies of learner-initiated WBAs based on a prospective entrustment-supervision scale and resultant narrative feedback were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Predictors for indirect supervision levels were explored via regression analysis, and narrative feedback was coded using thematic content analysis. Students evaluated the WBA after each clerkship rotation. Results EPA 1 (“Take a patient’s history”), EPA 2 (“Assess physical & mental status”) and EPA 8 (“Document & present a clinical encounter”) were most frequently used for learner-initiated WBAs throughout the clerkship rotations in a sample of 83 students. Clinical residents signed off on the majority of the WBAs (71%). EPAs 1, 2, and 8 showed the largest increases in self-entrustment and received most of the indirect supervision level ratings. We found a moderate, positive correlation between self-entrusted supervision levels at the end of the clerkship and the number of documented entrustment-supervision ratings per EPA (p < 0.0001). The number of entrustment ratings explained 6.5% of the variance in the supervisors’ ratings for EPA 1. Narrative feedback was documented for 79% (n = 214) of the WBAs. Most narratives addressed the Medical Expert role (77%, n = 208) and used reinforcement (59%, n = 161) as a feedback strategy. Students perceived the feedback as beneficial. Conclusions Using formative WBAs with an entrustment-supervision scale and prompts for written feedback facilitated targeted, high-quality feedback and effectively supported students’ development toward self-entrusted, indirect supervision levels.

Download Full-text

Exam Room Culture

Journal of Patient Experience ◽

10.1177/2374373521996962 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

pp. 237437352199696

Author(s):

Paul J Hershberger ◽

Katharine Conway ◽

Justin M Chu

Keyword(s):

Psychological Safety ◽

Clinical Encounter ◽

Clinical Environment ◽

Exam Room

If the minds of patients could be read, one would likely discover thoughts related to the culture of the clinical environment. “Do I belong here?” “Will I be judged?” “Is it safe to be honest?” We consider what physicians can do to create a culture in the exam room that corresponds to features found in the cultures of successful organizations. These characteristics include an emphasis on psychological safety for patients, a willingness to be vulnerable on the part of the physician, and a sincere focus on the patient’s purpose. Our conclusion is that by prioritizing such elements, the clinical encounter may be more satisfying and productive for the patient and physician alike.

Download Full-text

The Doctor–Patient Relationship: Does Christianity Make a Difference?

Christian bioethics Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality ◽

10.1093/cb/cbaa018 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 27 (1) ◽

pp. 1-13

Author(s):

James J Delaney

Keyword(s):

Assisted Suicide ◽

Clinical Encounter ◽

Patient Relationship ◽

Physician Assisted Suicide ◽

Doctor Patient Relationship ◽

Moral Tradition ◽

Practice Of Medicine ◽

Christian Understanding ◽

The Relationship ◽

Perinatal Hospice

Abstract The nature of the doctor–patient relationship is central to the practice of medicine and thus to bioethics. The American Medical Association (in AMA principles of medical ethics, available at: https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/patient-physician-relationships, 2016) states, “The practice of medicine, and its embodiment in the clinical encounter between a patient and a physician, is fundamentally a moral activity that arises from the imperative to care for patients and to alleviate suffering.” In this issue of Christian Bioethics, leading scholars consider what relevance (if any) Christianity brings to the relationship between physician and patient: does Christianity make a difference? The contributors consider this question from several different perspectives: the proper model of medicine, the role that the Christian moral tradition can play in medicine in a secular pluralistic society, how a Christian understanding of virtue can inform practices such as perinatal hospice and physician-assisted suicide, and whether or not appeals to Christian values can (or should) ground a physician’s right to conscientious objection.

Download Full-text