scholarly journals Ascertaining patients’ understandings of their condition: a conversation analysis of contradictory norms in cancer specialist consultations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Dew ◽  
J Barton ◽  
J Stairmand ◽  
D Sarfati ◽  
L Signal

© 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Patient-centred care requires patients to be active participants in decision-making in consultations. Decision-making participation requires patients to understand their condition and to be able to convey their health literacy to medical specialists they encounter. Based on conversation analysis of 18 audio-recorded consultations between cancer patients and a range of cancer care specialists, this article analyses the ways cancer specialists attempt to ascertain their patient’s understanding of their disease. Cancer specialists routinely enquire about their patient’s understanding. In doing so, they phrase enquiries in different ways, resulting in different patient responses. How questions are phrased can require patients to deal with contradictory norms in the consultation, such as the patient being competent but not assuming medical expertise, and potentially hinder patient participation. Alternatively, questions can allow patients to draw on their own experience and so facilitate greater patient involvement. Questions aimed directly at the patient’s medical understanding result in minimal or negative responses. In contrast, questions directed at what the patient has been told or has experienced, elicit longer and more in-depth responses from the patient. This analysis illuminates the co-construction of cancer specialist consultations and suggests simple ways in which patient involvement in the consultation can be facilitated.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Dew ◽  
J Barton ◽  
J Stairmand ◽  
D Sarfati ◽  
L Signal

© 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Patient-centred care requires patients to be active participants in decision-making in consultations. Decision-making participation requires patients to understand their condition and to be able to convey their health literacy to medical specialists they encounter. Based on conversation analysis of 18 audio-recorded consultations between cancer patients and a range of cancer care specialists, this article analyses the ways cancer specialists attempt to ascertain their patient’s understanding of their disease. Cancer specialists routinely enquire about their patient’s understanding. In doing so, they phrase enquiries in different ways, resulting in different patient responses. How questions are phrased can require patients to deal with contradictory norms in the consultation, such as the patient being competent but not assuming medical expertise, and potentially hinder patient participation. Alternatively, questions can allow patients to draw on their own experience and so facilitate greater patient involvement. Questions aimed directly at the patient’s medical understanding result in minimal or negative responses. In contrast, questions directed at what the patient has been told or has experienced, elicit longer and more in-depth responses from the patient. This analysis illuminates the co-construction of cancer specialist consultations and suggests simple ways in which patient involvement in the consultation can be facilitated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 203 ◽  
pp. e817-e818
Author(s):  
Kerry Kilbridge ◽  
William Martin-Doyle* ◽  
Christopher Filson ◽  
Quoc-Dien Trinh ◽  
Sierra Williams ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 684-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon P. Kim ◽  
Sara J. Knight ◽  
Cecilia Tomori ◽  
Kathleen M. Colella ◽  
Richard A. Schoor ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
Sinead Cuffe ◽  
Henrique Hon ◽  
Xin Qiu ◽  
Sohaib Masroor ◽  
Bradley De Souza ◽  
...  

13 Background: Pharmacogenomics is increasingly utilized in oncology; however, there is little knowledge concerning cancer patients’ or oncologists’ attitudes toward PGT decision-making in clinical practice. Methods: A broad cross-section of cancer patients were interviewed regarding their attitudes toward PGT using hypothetical time, efficacy and toxicity trade-off and willingness-to-pay scenarios (N=278) and/or quantitative choice-based conjoint analysis surveys (N=264); 64 cancer specialists/physicians in training were surveyed similarly. Results: Of patients participating in the trade-off scenario phase of study, >94% accepted chemotherapy, and of these, >98% wanted PGT that identifies a subset of patients either benefiting from chemotheraphy or who were at risk of severe toxicity. Patients were willing to pay between CAD $1,000-$1,900 for PGT and accept wait times for results of 2-3 weeks. Similar findings were observed in the conjoint phase of the study, with preferences for PGT starting to decline when the out-of-pocket costs reached CAD $500-$1,500, wait time for results exceeded 14 days, and when the prevalence of the genetic variant fell below 25%. Adjuvant patients’ acceptance of PGT was most influenced by cost (decision weight [DW]=41%) and prevalence of the genetic variant associated with lack of benefit from chemo (DW=26%). Metastatic patients were most influenced by cost (DW=49%) and wait times (DW=31%). More patients reported difficulty understanding conjoint surveys (14%) than trade-off scenarios (7%; p=0.01). 81% of patients wanted to be involved in decision-making regarding PGT; while 30% of physicians felt it should be a physician-only decision (p=0.006). However, 21% of patients and 5% of physicians admitted to not understanding PGT, while just 14% of physicians rated themselves as very knowledgeable regarding PGT. Conclusions: Cancer patients overwhelmingly accept and want to be involved in decision-making regarding PGT, to a greater extent than what physicians prefer. However, communication of PGT information was a potential barrier, as a considerable minority lacked the necessary knowledge to facilitate informed decision-making. Improved patient and physician education is necessary.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e018896 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyriakos Souliotis ◽  
Lily-Evangelia Peppou ◽  
Chara Tzavara ◽  
Eirini Agapidaki ◽  
Dimitrios Varvaras ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEven though patient involvement in health policy decision-making is well documented, studies evaluating the degree and impact of this participation are scarce. This is even more conspicuous in the case of cancer. There is evidence showing that patients with the same type of cancer and at the same stage of the disease will receive different treatments in different countries. Therefore, it is crucial to assess the degree of patient participation in health policy decision-making across Europe, as it may result in health inequalities across countries. In a response to this research call, the present study aimed to provide a snapshot of cancer patients’ organisation (CPO) participation in health policy processes in European Union (EU)-28 countries.SettingCPOs from the EU-28 countries.ParticipantsPrimary and secondary outcome measures: information about participants’ sociodemographic characteristics and their involvement in their CPO was collected as well as data about the CPO. A 17-item index containing questions about the type and impact of participation in various facets of health policy decision-making was used to assess the degree of CPOs participation in health policy decision-making processes and its impact.


2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 654-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Salloch ◽  
Peter Ritter ◽  
Sebastian Wäscher ◽  
Jochen Vollmann ◽  
Jan Schildmann

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110652
Author(s):  
Luke X. van Rossenberg ◽  
David Ring ◽  
Xander Jacobs ◽  
George Sulkers ◽  
Mark van Heijl ◽  
...  

We analyzed (1) the correspondence of patient and clinician perceived patient involvement in decision making and ratings made by independent observer's independent ratings, as well as (2), factors associated with patient-perceived involvement, among patients seeking hand specialty care. During 63 visits, the patient, their hand specialist, and 2 independent observers each rated patient involvement in decision making using the 9-item shared decision-making questionnaire for patients and clinicians, and the 5-item observing patient involvement scale (OPTION-5). We also measured health literacy (Newest Vital Sign), patient and visit characteristics (gender, age, race, years of education, occupation, marital status, and family present). There was no correlation ( ρ = 0.17; P = .17) between patient (median 42, IQR 36-44.5) and clinician (38, IQR 35-43) ratings of patient involvement in decision making. Independently rated patient involvement correlated moderately with a specialist ( ρ = 0.35, P <.01), but not patient ( ρ = 0.22, P = .08) ratings. The finding that patient perception of their involvement in decision making has little or no relationship to independently rated clinician communication effectiveness and effort, suggests that other aspects of the encounter—such as empathy and trust—may merit investigation as mediators of the patient agency.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 296-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yannis Pappas ◽  
Jitka Vseteckova ◽  
Nikolas Mastellos ◽  
Geva Greenfield ◽  
Gurch Randhawa

This article provides an analysis of the skills that health professionals and patients employ in reaching diagnosis and decision-making in telemedicine consultations. As governmental priorities continue to emphasize patient involvement in the management of their disease, there is an increasing need to accurately capture the provider–patient interactions in clinical encounters. Drawing on conversation analysis of 10 video-mediated consultations in 3 National Health Service settings in England, this study examines the interaction between patients, General Practitioner (GPs), nurses, and consultants during diagnosis and decision-making, with the aim to identify the range of skills that participants use in the process and capture the interprofessional communication and patient involvement in the diagnosis and decision-making phases of telemedicine consultations. The analysis shows that teleconsultations enhance collaborative working among professionals and enable GPs and nurses to develop their skills and actively participate in diagnosis and decision-making by contributing primary care–specific knowledge to the consultation. However, interprofessional interaction may result in limited patient involvement in decision-making. The findings of this study can be used to inform training programs in telemedicine that focus on the development of effective skills for professionals and the provision of information to patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document