Agenda-setting revisited: When and how do primary-care physicians solicit patients' additional concerns?

Challenges to Exploring the Patient Perspective in Palliative Care Conversations: A Qualitative Study Among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Heart Failure Patients and Their Health Care Professionals

Objectives

The aim of this study was to reveal the challenges faced in exploring the patient's perspective as experienced by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or chronic heart failure and their health care professionals (HCPs), including the circumstances under which these challenges are experienced during palliative care conversations.

Methods

This is a qualitative, explorative study in the Netherlands using purposive sampling to create diversity in demographic variables of both patients and HCPs. Semistructured interviews with 12 patients and 7 HCPs were carried out with the use of topic lists. All interviews were audiorecorded, verbatim transcribed, and thematically analyzed.

Results

Patients find it challenging to express their wishes, preferences, and boundaries and say what is really preoccupying them, especially when they do not feel a good connection with their HCP. HCPs find it challenging to get to know the patient and discuss the patient's perspective particularly when patients are not proactive, open or realistic, or unable to understand or recall information.

Conclusions

Patients and HCPs seem to share the same aim: patients want to be known and understood and HCPs want to know and understand the patient as a unique individual. At the same time, they seem unable to personalize their conversations. To move beyond this impasse patients and HCPs need to take steps and be empowered to do so.

Medical Care as Flea Market Bargaining? An International Interdisciplinary Study of Varieties of Shared Decision Making in Physician-Patient Interactions

Phenomenon: Shared decision making (SDM) is a core ideal in the interaction between healthcare providers and patients, but the implementation of the SDM ideal in clinical routines has been a relatively slow process. Approach: In a sociological study, 71 interactions between physicians and simulated patients enacting chronic heart failure were video-recorded in China, Germany, the Netherlands, and Turkey as part of a quasi-experimental research design. Participating physicians varied in specialty and level of experience. The secondary analysis presented in this article used content analysis to study core components of SDM in all of the 71 interactions and a grounded theory approach to observe how physicians responded actively to patients even though they did not actively employ the SDM ideal. Findings: Full realization of the SDM ideal remains an exception, but various aspects of SDM in physician-patient interaction were observed in all four locations. Analyses of longer interactions show dynamic processes of interaction that sometimes surprised both patient and physician. We observed varieties of SDM that differ from the SDM ideal but arguably achieve what the SDM ideal is intended to achieve. Our analysis suggests a need to revisit the SDM ideal-to consider whether varieties of SDM may be acceptable, even valuable, in their own right. Insights: The gap between the SDM ideal and SDM as implemented in clinical practice may in part be explained by the tendency of medicine to define and teach SDM through a narrow lens of checklist evaluations. The authors support the argument that SDM defies a checklist approach. SDM is not uniform, but nuanced, dependent on circumstances and setting. As SDM is co-produced by patients and physicians in a dynamic process of interaction, medical researchers should consider and medical learners should be exposed to varieties of SDM-related practice rather than a single idealized model. Observing and discussing worked examples contributes to the physician's development of realistic expectations and personal professional growth.

Communication in Primary Healthcare: A State-of-the-Art Literature Review of Conversation-Analytic Research

We report the first state-of-the-art review of conversation-analytic (CA) research on communication in primary healthcare. We conducted a systematic search across multiple bibliographic databases and specialist sources and employed backward and forward citation tracking. We included 177 empirical studies spanning four decades of research and 16 different countries/health systems, with data in 17 languages. The majority of studies originated in United States and United Kingdom and focused on medical visits between physicians and adult patients. We generated three broad research themes in order to synthesize the study findings: managing agendas, managing participation, and managing authority. We characterize the state-of-the-art for each theme, illustrating the progression of the work and making comparisons across different languages and health systems, where possible. We consider practical applications of the findings, reflect on the state of current knowledge, and suggest some directions for future research. Data reported are in multiple languages.

Patients' Problem Presentation in China's Primary Care

Identifying patients' reasons for visiting is the central task at medical openings, the structure of which has been well studied in Western primary care, but much under-researched in China's mainland. Drawing on conversation analysis of 91 audio-recorded primary care consultations in China, this study explores interactional features of patients' problem presentation at medical openings in terms of sequential positions, forms, and contextual contingencies, which has implications for the model of medical service encounters in Chinese primary care openings. Although problem description is commonly solicited by doctors across cultures, Chinese patients' problem presentation often takes forms other than problem description. Nearly two thirds of problem presentation in our data are designed as a request-making action (57/91 cases), being more often self-initiated than solicited. This blurs the boundary between medical visits for new and non-new problems. The analysis of Chinese patients' problem presentation points to a high degree of patient agency in primary care in China, suggesting a strong orientation to the "provider-consumer" (vs. "professional-client") model of service encounters in the opening structure of doctor-patient interaction.

Is Solicitation of Problem Presentations Always Normative? How Chinese Patients Get to Present Their Reasons for Medical Visits

Research based on recordings made across numerous specialties and geographical locations has characterized doctors' solicitations of patients' reasons for the visit as normative. However, in our dataset of 132 audio-recordings of consultations in Chinese primary and secondary care, it was as common for patients to self-initiate giving the reason for their visit as it was for doctors to solicit these (n = 65 vs. n = 67 respectively). Based on a conversation analytic examination of our dataset, we show that doctors do not treat patient-initiated problem presentations as deviant. Whilst there are some contextual contingencies (related, for example, to the queuing-system) that might account for this novel finding, these are only partly explanatory. Instead, we argue that, relative to Western contexts, the participants in our data treat the medical consultation as akin to a service-encounter in which patients are entitled to ask for what they want. Implications for understanding medical openings and health outcomes are discussed.

Taxonomy and effectiveness of clinician agenda-setting questions in routine ambulatory encounters: A mixed method study

OBJECTIVES

Despite decades of communication training, studies repeatedly demonstrate that clinicians fail to elicit patients' agendas. Our goal was to provide clinicians with actionable guidance about the effectiveness of agenda-soliciting questions.

METHODS

We coded clinician agenda-soliciting questions and patient responses in audio-recorded ambulatory encounters at an urban academic hospital. To evaluate the association between question type and odds of the patient raising a concern, we performed mixed-effects logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 346 agenda-soliciting questions within 138 visits (mean 2.51/visit; range 0-9). Agenda-soliciting questions were categorized as personal state inquiries (37%, "How are you?"), feeling-focused (5% "How're you feeling?"), problem-focused (12%; "Are you having any problems"), direct solicitations (3%; "Anything you want to discuss today?"), "what else" (3%), "anything else" (14%), leading (16%; "Nothing else today?"), and space-reducing (11% "Anything else? Smoking?"). Patients raised a concern in response to 107 clinician questions (27%). Patients were more likely to raise a concern to direct solicitation (OR 22.95, 95% CI 2.62-200.70) or "what else" (OR 4.68, 95% CI 1.05-20.77) questions.

CONCLUSIONS

The most effective agenda-soliciting questions are used least frequently by clinicians.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians should elicit patient agendas by using direct language, and solicit additional concerns using "what else" vs. "anything else" questions.

Patient-Centered Communication Tools for the Patch Test Clinic

Patient-centered communication positively impacts the clinical encounter. Multiple strategies exist to improve communication between providers and their patients; the application and impact of these strategies have been studied in multiple specialties, though little exists regarding communication best practices in the patch test clinic. Because the procedural components of patch testing often span the course of an entire week, effective communication with patients during the patch testing visit is important for not only technical success, but also patient understanding and experience. In this study, we highlight the value of beginning the patch testing visit with clear introductions and agenda setting, improving patient understanding and engagement through methods such as teach backs and cycles of questions and answers that create patient-provider dialogue, and using communication techniques to make expressions of empathy. We provide detailed examples regarding the application of these techniques to the patch testing process, aimed at enhancing the patch testing experience and improving clinical outcomes. Our review exemplifies how dermatologists can leverage communication tools to improve patient satisfaction and outcomes during patch testing.

Displaying concerns within telephone triage conversations of callers with chest discomfort in out-of-hours primary care: A conversation analytic study

OBJECTIVES

In primary care out of hours service (OHS-PC), triage nurses ask questions to assign urgency level for medical assessment. A semi-automatic decision tool (the Netherlands Triage Standard, NTS) facilitates triage nurses with key questions, but does not leave much room for paying attention to callers' concerns. We wanted to understand how callers with chest pain formulate their concerns and are helped further during telephone triage.

METHODS

We conducted a conversation analytic study of 68 triage calls from callers with chest discomfort who contacted OHS-PC of which we selected 35 transcripts in which concerns were raised. We analyzed expressions of concerns and the corresponding triage nurse response.

RESULTS

Due to the task-oriented nature of the NTS, callers' concerns were overlooked. For callers, however, discussing concerns was relevant, stressed by the finding that the majority of callers with chest discomfort expressed concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Interactional difficulties in concern-related discussions arised directly after expressed concerns if not handled adequately, or during the switch to the counseling phase.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

When callers display concerns during telephone triage, we recommend triage nurses to explore them briefly and then return to the sequence of tasks described in the NTS-assisted triage process.

Making Conversation Analysis Accessible: A Conceptual Guide for Health Services Researchers

The quality of healthcare communication can impact both experiences and outcomes. We highlight aspects of communication that can be systematically examined using Conversation Analysis (CA) and provide guidance about how researchers can incorporate CA into healthcare studies. CA is a qualitative method for studying naturally occurring communication by analyzing recurrent, systematic practices of verbal and nonverbal behavior. CA involves examining audio- or video-recorded conversations and their transcriptions to identify practices speakers use to communicate and interpret behavior. We explain what distinguishes CA from other methods that study communication and highlight three accessible CA approaches that researchers can use in their research design, analysis, or implementation of communication interventions. Specifically, these approaches focus on how talk is produced (specific words, framing, and syntax), by whom, and when it occurs in the conversation. These approaches can be leveraged to generate hypotheses and to identify patterns of behavior that inform empirically driven communication interventions.

Addressing colon cancer patients' needs during follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic: a multicenter qualitative observational study

Purpose

To describe colon cancer patients’ needs and how healthcare providers respond to these needs during routine follow-up consultations in hospital.

Methods

A multicenter qualitative observational study, consisting of follow-up consultations by surgeons and specialized oncology nurses. Consultations were analyzed according to Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences. Patients’ questions, cues, and concerns were derived from the data and categorized into supportive care domains. Responses of healthcare providers were defined as providing or reducing space for disclosure. Patient satisfaction with care was measured with a short questionnaire.

Results

Consultations with 30 patients were observed. Questions typically centered around the health system and information domain (i.e., follow-up schedule and test results; 92%). Cues and concerns were mostly associated with the physical and daily living domain (i.e., experiencing symptoms and difficulties resuming daily routine; 43%), followed by health system and information (i.e., miscommunication or lack of clarity about follow-up; 28%), and psychological domain (i.e., fear of recurrence and complications; 28%). Problems in the sexuality domain hardly ever arose (0%). Healthcare providers provided space to talk about half of the cues and concerns (54%). Responses to cancer-related versus unrelated problems were similar. Overall, the patients were satisfied with the information and communication received.

Conclusions

Colon cancer patients express various needs during consultations. Healthcare providers respond to different types of needs in a similar fashion. We encourage clinicians to discuss all supportive care domains, including sexuality, and provide space for further disclosure. General practitioners are trained to provide holistic care and could play a greater role.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07222-z.

End-of-Life Decision Making Between Doctors and Parents in NICU: The Development and Assessment of a Conversation Analysis Coding Framework

We report the development and assessment of a novel coding framework in the context of research into neonatal end-of-life decision making conversations. Data comprised 27 formal conversations between doctors and parents of critically ill babies, recorded in two neonatal intensive care units. The coding framework was developed from a qualitative analysis of the recordings using the method of conversation analysis (CA). Codes underpinned by our qualitative analysis had in the main moderate to strong agreement (inter-rater reliability) between coders; three codes had lower agreement reflecting the use of euphemisms for death and disability. Coding these interactions confirmed the significance of the doctors' talk in terms of parental involvement in decision-making, whilst highlighting areas warranting further qualitative analysis. This quantifiable representation provides a novel outcome based on evidence that is internal to the conversation rather than influenced by other factors related to the baby's care or outcome.

Talking About Things: A Patient Cue for Sensitive Healthcare Problems and Effective Physician Responses

In routine healthcare consultations, patients often use prefaces containing the word "thing", including "the thing is", "there's this thing" or "one more thing". Although "thing" is an all-encompassing term that is used in myriad ways, in this article we show that thing-prefaces perform a specific job. This study uses Conversation Analysis to analyze 90 video-recorded primary care consultations with 14 primary care physicians in the United States. Patients' thing-prefaces mark the upcoming talk as a disclosure of sensitive information that may reflect negatively on the patient, physician or service (e.g., medication nonadherence, refill was not sent to pharmacy). Patients pursue explicit resolution of these problems (e.g., personalized recommendation, lab work, referral) despite these problems being downplayed and treated as delicate. Because patients may "talk around" these sensitive issues, thing-prefaces can be an important cue for physicians that patients are seeking resolution for a sensitive healthcare problem.

Thirty-Minute Psychiatric Management Visits in Academic Medical Centers: Framing and Exploring Distinct Clinical-Educational Social Processes

ABSTRACT

To address high clinical demand and manage workflow, some university-based practice settings are tending to replace traditional hour-long outpatient appointments with 30-minute psychiatric management visits, which must comply with multiple regulatory requirements for documentation and billing. This care model can significantly shape the culture of psychiatric treatment and education. Based on the limited published literature on this topic and pooled experiences of faculty, residents, and administrators, this article offers observations and raises questions concerning 1) clinical, educational and administrative benefits, limitations, and challenges for conducting 30-minute psychiatric visits in training contexts; 2) how administrative impositions affecting resident and faculty time and attention impact clinical encounters; 3) how various teaching settings manage regulatory requirements differently; and 4) considerations for education needs and opportunities, research gaps, and policy implications. Quality of care and education could be improved by judicious overhaul of administrative requirements to minimize burdens offering little clinical or educational value.

"We're All Time Poor": Experienced Clinicians' and Students' Perceptions of Challenges Related to Patient Communication

PHENOMENON

Communication is a complex and essential element of clinical practice. It is widely accepted that communication skills can be taught and learned, but challenges remain for clinicians in achieving effective communication with patients. This study explored the patient-communication challenges faced by both medical students and experienced clinicians.

APPROACH

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty medical students and nineteen experienced clinicians from a range of medical disciplines. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and transcriptions subjected to thematic analysis and coding to quantify the challenges discussed.

FINDINGS

There was remarkable consistency in the challenges described by both groups of participants, with eight predominant challenges identified: time constraints and chaotic environments, rapport building, patient characteristics, reluctance, omissions, assumptions, decision-making, and keeping conversations focused.

INSIGHTS

Medical curricula often focus on communication challenges associated with complex or sensitive clinical situations, but many of the challenges identified occur in routine consultations. Both pre-service and post-graduate medical training should adopt strategies to help build students' and clinicians' skills in managing these challenges from the outset of training.

Visit Linearity in Primary Care Visits for Patients with Chronic Pain on Long-term Opioid Therapy

BACKGROUND

Physicians and patients report frustration after primary care visits for chronic pain. The need to shift between multiple clinical topics to address competing demands during visits may contribute to this frustration.

OBJECTIVE

This study creates a novel measure, "visit linearity," to assess visit organization and examines whether visits that require less shifting back and forth between topics are associated with better patient and physician visit experiences. It also explores whether visit linearity differs depending on the following: (1) whether or not pain is a major topic of the visit and (2) whether or not pain is the first topic raised.

DESIGN

This study analyzed 41 video-recorded visits using inductive, qualitative analysis informed by conversation analysis. We used linear regression to evaluate associations between visit organization and post-visit measures of participant experience.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients were established adult patients planning to discuss pain management during routine primary care. Physicians were internal or family medicine residents.

MAIN MEASURES

Visit linearity, total topics, return topics, topic shifts, time per topic, visit duration, pain main topic, pain first topic, patient experience, and physician difficulty.

KEY RESULTS

Visits had a mean of 8.1 total topics (standard deviation (SD)=3.46), 14.5 topic shifts (SD=6.28), and 1.9 topic shifts per topic (SD=0.62). Less linear visits (higher topic shifts to topic ratio) were associated with greater physician visit difficulty (β=7.28, p<0.001) and worse patient experience (β= -0.62, p=0.03). Visit linearity was not significantly impacted by pain as a major or first topic raised.

CONCLUSIONS

In primary care visits for patients with chronic pain taking opioids, more linear visits were associated with better physician and patient experience. Frequent topic shifts may be disruptive. If confirmed in future research, this finding implies that reducing shifts between topics could help decrease mutual frustration related to discussions about pain.

Analyzing Expert Criteria for Authentic Resident Communication Skills

Phenomenon: Training and assessing communication skills requires flexible and holistic approaches, including feedback practices. Historically, assessing communication skills has predominantly relied on itemized scoring, which is less useful for providing meaningful feedback to learners. Even more troublesome, theoretical scoring criteria tend to become a refractive lens allowing observation of only the conduct that aligns with the theory. Few skills assessment efforts have embraced a holistic understanding of how physician-patient communication skills are enacted in real patient care. Therefore, this study focused on what experts refer to when they speak about physicians' communication skills and what they treat as important when evaluating these skills enacted during real patient encounters.Approach: This qualitative study was based on observations and grounded theory. Residents' encounters with real patients were recorded as part of a formative communication skills assessment program from July 2015 to June 2016. Evaluation panels with diverse backgrounds (e.g., medicine, education, communication, conversation analysis, and layperson) listened to these recordings and jointly developed feedback comments for the resident from January 2016 to July 2017. For this study, we recorded forty-one panel discussions to observe their consensus evaluation. We conducted open and axial coding using a constant comparison approach to generate themes from the data.Findings: Elements of communication skills were connected and interdependent around the concepts of thoroughness and natural flow, which were not addressed by formative assessment criteria. Themes included (1) thoroughness within a boundary via agenda-setting; (2) natural yet, controlled flow: authentic conversation by active listening and questioning; (3) making agenda setting explicit to all parties in the beginning; (4) designing questions using both open-ended and closed questions; (5) pre-/post-conditions for patient education: patient contextual factors and teach-back; (6) preconditions for shared decision-making: patient education and patient contextual factors; and (7) multifaceted empathy demonstrated in multiple ways.Insights: The main message of the study findings is that communication skills criteria should be treated as organically interrelated and connected in assessing physicians' communication skills. Current communication skills assessment practice should be revisited as it itemizes physicians' communication skills as distinct and separate constructs rather than mutually affecting dynamics. Rather than imposing a theoretical rubric, assessment criteria should evolve through naturalistic observations of physician-patient communication.

Antibiotic Prescribing and Doctor-Patient Communication During Consultations for Respiratory Tract Infections: A Video Observation Study in Out-of-Hours Primary Care

Objective: Communication skills can reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, which could help to tackle antibiotic resistance. General practitioners often overestimate patient expectations for an antibiotic. In this study, we describe how general practitioners and patients with respiratory tract infections (RTI) communicate about their problem, including the reason for encounter and ideas, concerns, and expectations (ICE), and how this relates to (non-)antibiotic prescribing in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care.

Methods: A qualitative descriptive framework analysis of video-recorded consultations during OOH primary care focusing on doctor-patient communication.

Results: We analyzed 77 videos from 19 general practitioners. General practitioners using patient-centered communication skills received more information on the perspective of the patients on the illness period. For some patients, the reason for the encounter was motivated by their belief that a general practitioner (GP) visit will alter the course of their illness. The ideas, concerns, and expectations often remained implicit, but the concerns were expressed by the choice of words, tone of voice, repetition of words, etc. Delayed prescribing was sometimes used to respond to implicit patient expectations for an antibiotic. Patients accepted a non-antibiotic management plan well.

Conclusion: Not addressing the ICE of patients, or their reason to consult the GP OOH, could drive assumptions about patient expectations for antibiotics early on and antibiotic prescribing later in the consultation.

Communicating with patients and families about illness progression and end of life: a review of studies using direct observation of clinical practice

BACKGROUND

There is growing recognition that a diverse range of healthcare professionals need competence in palliative approaches to care. Effective communication is a core component of such practice. This article informs evidence-based communication about illness progression and end of life through a rapid review of studies that directly observe how experienced clinicians manage such discussions.

METHODS

The current rapid review updates findings of a 2014 systematic review, focussing more specifically on evidence related to illness progression and end-of-life conversations. Literature searches were conducted in nine bibliographic databases. Studies using conversation analysis or discourse analysis to examine recordings of actual conversations about illness progression or end of life were eligible for inclusion in the review. An aggregative approach was used to synthesise the findings of included studies.

RESULTS

Following screening, 26 sources were deemed to meet eligibility criteria. Synthesis of study findings identified the structure and functioning of ten communication practices used in discussions about illness progression and end-of-life.

CONCLUSION

The ten practices identified underpin five evidence-based recommendations for communicating with patients or family members about illness progression and end of life.

Filling a gap in safety metrics: development of a patient-centred framework to identify and categorise patient-reported breakdowns related to the diagnostic process in ambulatory care

BACKGROUND

Patients and families are important contributors to the diagnostic team, but their perspectives are not reflected in current diagnostic measures. Patients/families can identify some breakdowns in the diagnostic process beyond the clinician's view. We aimed to develop a framework with patients/families to help organisations identify and categorise patient-reported diagnostic process-related breakdowns (PRDBs) to inform organisational learning.

METHOD

A multi-stakeholder advisory group including patients, families, clinicians, and experts in diagnostic error, patient engagement and safety, and user-centred design, co-developed a framework for PRDBs in ambulatory care. We tested the framework using standard qualitative analysis methods with two physicians and one patient coder, analysing 2165 patient-reported ambulatory errors in two large surveys representing 25 425 US respondents. We tested intercoder reliability of breakdown categorisation using the Gwet's AC1 and Cohen's kappa statistic. We considered agreement coefficients 0.61-0.8=good agreement and 0.81-1.00=excellent agreement.

RESULTS

The framework describes 7 patient-reported breakdown categories (with 40 subcategories), 19 patient-identified contributing factors and 11 potential patient-reported impacts. Patients identified breakdowns in each step of the diagnostic process, including missing or inaccurate main concerns and symptoms; missing/outdated test results; and communication breakdowns such as not feeling heard or misalignment between patient and provider about symptoms, events, or their significance. The frequency of PRDBs was 6.4% in one dataset and 6.9% in the other. Intercoder reliability showed good-to-excellent reliability in each dataset: AC1 0.89 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.90) to 0.96 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.97); kappa 0.64 (95% CI 0.62, to 0.66) to 0.85 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The PRDB framework, developed in partnership with patients/families, can help organisations identify and reliably categorise PRDBs, including some that are invisible to clinicians; guide interventions to engage patients and families as diagnostic partners; and inform whole organisational learning.

Implementation of Patient Engagement Tools in Electronic Health Records to Enhance Patient-Centered Communication: Protocol for Feasibility Evaluation and Preliminary Results

Background

Patient–physician communication during clinical encounters is essential to ensure quality of care. Many studies have attempted to improve patient–physician communication. Incorporating patient priorities into agenda setting and medical decision-making are fundamental to patient-centered communication. Efficient and scalable approaches are needed to empower patients to speak up and prepare physicians to respond. Leveraging electronic health records (EHRs) in engaging patients and health care teams has the potential to enhance the integration of patient priorities in clinical encounters. A systematic approach to eliciting and documenting patient priorities before encounters could facilitate effective communication in such encounters.

Objective

In this paper, we report the design and implementation of a set of EHR tools built into clinical workflows for facilitating patient–physician joint agenda setting and the documentation of patient concerns in the EHRs for ambulatory encounters.

Methods

We engaged health information technology leaders and users in three health care systems for developing and implementing a set of EHR tools. The goal of these tools is to standardize the elicitation of patient priorities by using a previsit “patient important issue” questionnaire distributed through the patient portal to the EHR. We built additional EHR documentation tools to facilitate patient–staff communication when the staff records the vital signs and the reason for the visit in the EHR while in the examination room, with a simple transmission method for physicians to incorporate patient concerns in EHR notes.

Results

The study is ongoing. The anticipated completion date for survey data collection is November 2021. A total of 34,037 primary care patients from three health systems (n=26,441; n=5136; and n=2460 separately recruited from each system) used the previsit patient important issue questionnaire in 2020. The adoption of the digital previsit questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic was much higher in one health care system because it expanded the use of the questionnaire from physicians participating in trials to all primary care providers midway through the year. It also required the use of this previsit questionnaire for eCheck-ins, which are required for telehealth encounters. Physicians and staff suggested anecdotally that this questionnaire helped patient–clinician communication, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

EHR tools have the potential to facilitate the integration of patient priorities into agenda setting and documentation in real-world primary care practices. Early results suggest the feasibility and acceptability of such digital tools in three health systems. EHR tools can support patient engagement and clinicians’ work during in-person and telehealth visits. They could potentially exert a sustained influence on patient and clinician communication behaviors in contrast to prior ad hoc educational efforts targeting patients or clinicians.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03385512; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385512

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/30431

How hospitalized older adults share concerns during daily rounds

OBJECTIVE

To explore how hospitalized older adults' concerns are solicited and shared during daily rounds.

METHODS

We audio recorded 40 physician-patient conversations during daily rounds in a Veterans Affairs Hospital. We developed codes from the conversation analysis (a qualitative method) for the event sequence analysis (a quantitative method) to calculate the conditional probabilities of physicians soliciting for general concerns leading to patients sharing concerns. We used a mixed-effects Poisson regression to calculate the relationship between number of concerns shared and patient education.

RESULTS

Most of the 141 concerns were shared during the assessment questions and discussion of the plan of care, such as concerns about the patient's caregiving responsibilities. The conditional probability was higher when physicians solicited for concerns after the assessment questions (0.56) than during the opening (0.25) or the closing (0.19) of the conversation. The design of the solicitation influenced the probability of patients sharing concerns. The number of concerns shared did not differ by level of education.

CONCLUSION

Physicians can provide opportunities for patients to share concerns.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Soliciting for concerns after the assessment questions, asking "what" concerns a patient may have, and asking about caregiving responsibilities may be useful for patients to share their concerns.

Modes of Interaction in Naturally Occurring Medical Encounters With General Practitioners: The "One in a Million" Study

In this article, we qualitatively explore the manner and style in which medical encounters between patients and general practitioners (GPs) are mutually conducted, as exhibited in situ in 10 consultations sourced from the One in a Million: Primary Care Consultations Archive in England. Our main objectives are to identify interactional modes, to develop a classification of these modes, and to uncover how modes emerge and shift both within and between consultations. Deploying an interactional perspective and a thematic and narrative analysis of consultation transcripts, we identified five distinctive interactional modes: question and answer (Q&A) mode, lecture mode, probabilistic mode, competition mode, and narrative mode. Most modes are GP-led. Mode shifts within consultations generally map on to the chronology of the medical encounter. Patient-led narrative modes are initiated by patients themselves, which demonstrates agency. Our classification of modes derives from complete naturally occurring consultations, covering a wide range of symptoms, and may have general applicability.

Delivering remote consultations: Talking the talk

INTRODUCTION

There is an increasing affinity for remote health consultations (including telephone and virtual platforms), enabling new models of accessing services to evolve. Whilst many key skills are transferable from traditional to remote consultations, there is even greater emphasis on verbal communication skills during these interactions.

PURPOSE

This masterclass considers the communication skills required for delivering remote health care consultations, in particular focussing on: 12 interactional features in an opening sequence of a remote call; active listening; how to offer advice using the Ask-Offer-Ask framework; and subtleties in phrasing and prosody when closing a call that may indicate a level of satisfaction (or otherwise).

IMPLICATIONS

In planning for digitally-enabled services to become mainstream, the differences in communication between remote and face-to-face consultations must be recognised and embraced.

Patient-Centered Appointment Scheduling: a Call for Autonomy, Continuity, and Creativity

When making an appointment, patients are generally unaware of how much clinician time is available to address their concerns. Similarly, the primary care clinician is often unaware of what the patient expects to accomplish during the visit, leading to uncertainty about how much time they can allot to each sequentially appearing concern, and whether they can reasonably expect to address necessary preventive services and chronic disease management. Neither patient nor clinician expectations can be adequately managed through standardized scheduling templates, which assign a fixed appointment length based on a single stated reason for the visit. As such, standardized appointment scheduling may contribute to inefficient use of valuable face-to-face time, patient and clinician dissatisfaction, and low-value care. Herein, we suggest several potential mechanisms for improving the scheduling process, including (1) entrusting scheduling to the primary care team; (2) advance visit planning; (3) pro-active engagement of ancillary team members including behavioral health, nursing, social work, and pharmacy; and (4) application of innovative, technologically advanced solutions such as telehealth and artificial intelligence to the scheduling process. These changes have the potential to improve efficiency, patient and clinician satisfaction, and health outcomes, while decreasing low-value testing and return visits for unaddressed concerns.

Agenda setting and visit openings in primary care visits involving patients taking opioids for chronic pain

Background

Agenda setting is associated with more efficient care and better patient experience. This study develops a taxonomy of visit opening styles to assess use of agenda and non-agenda setting visit openings and their effects on participant experience.

Methods

This observational study analyzed 83 video recorded US primary care visits at a single academic medical center in California involving family medicine and internal medicine resident physicians (n = 49) and patients (n = 83) with chronic pain on opioids. Using conversation analysis, we developed a coding scheme that assessed the presence of agenda setting, distinct visit opening styles, and the number of total topics, major topics, surprise patient topics, and returns to prior topics discussed. Exploratory quantitative analyses were conducted to assess the relationship of agenda setting and visit opening styles with post-visit measures of both patient experience and physician perception of visit difficulty.

Results

We identified 2 visit opening styles representing agenda setting (agenda eliciting, agenda reframing) and 3 non-agenda setting opening styles (open-ended question, patient launch, physician launch). Agenda setting was only performed in 11% of visits and was associated with fewer surprise patient topics than visits without agenda setting (mean (SD) 2.67 (1.66) versus 4.28 (3.23), p = 0.03).

Conclusions

In this study of patients with chronic pain, resident physicians rarely performed agenda setting, whether defined in terms of “agenda eliciting” or “agenda re-framing.” Agenda setting was associated with fewer surprise topics. Understanding the communication context and outcomes of agenda setting may inform better use of this communication tool in primary care  practice.

Patient autonomy in the consultation: How signalling structure can facilitate patient-centred care

OBJECTIVE

To identify types and functions of doctors' verbal signalling behaviours used to share consultation structure with patients.

METHOD

Doctors' verbal utterances signalling what would happen in the consultation were identified by two independent raters from transcripts of 78 simulated consultations from a postgraduate examination for physicians. In total, 974 behaviours were categorised as informing, inviting or instructing. Principles adopted from Speech Act Theory and Conversation Analysis were used to examine their function from their literal meaning and use in context.

RESULTS

Signalling behaviours to inform were most frequent, particularly 'signposts', with less informative signalling behaviours also found ('posts without signs' and 'signs without posts'). Behaviours to invite involvement offered limited choice. Doctors also instructed the patient in what to do (behaviour) or not to do (emotion). Behaviours signalled more 'micro-level' changes than broader consultation aims. Signalling behaviours carried roles beyond their literal meaning ('hyperfunctions') and were combined ('stacked'), often seen deflecting the conversation away from patient concerns.

CONCLUSION

Doctors use a variety of verbal signalling behaviours with multiple functions. As well as sharing information, these behaviours regulate patient agency in the consultation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Doctors' signalling behaviours may play an important role in facilitating or inhibiting patient autonomy.

Initiating end-of-life decisions with parents of infants receiving neonatal intensive care

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether parent-initiated or doctor-initiated decisions about limiting life-sustaining treatment (LST) in neonatal care has consequences for how possible courses of action are presented.

METHOD

Formal conversations (n = 27) between doctors and parents of critically ill babies from two level 3 neonatal intensive care units were audio or video recorded. Sequences of talk where decisions about limiting LST were presented were analysed using Conversation Analysis and coded using a Conversation Analytic informed coding framework. Relationships between codes were analysed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

When parents initiated the decision point, doctors subsequently tended to refer to or list available options. When doctors initiated, they tended to use 'recommendations' or 'single-option' choice (conditional) formats (p=0.017) that did not include multiple treatment options. Parent initiations overwhelmingly concerned withdrawal, as opposed to withholding of LST (p=0.030).

CONCLUSION

Aligning parents to the trajectory of the news about their baby's poor condition may influence how the doctor subsequently presents the decision to limit LST, and thereby the extent to which parents are invited to participate in shared decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Explicitly proposing treatment options may provide parents with opportunities to be involved in decisions for their critically ill babies, thereby fostering shared decision-making.

Technological Innovation in Healthcare: Disrupting Old Systems to Create More Value for African American Patients in Academic Medical Centers

Healthcare in the United States (U.S.) has made incredible advances, but inefficiency and high costs continue to permeate the system. Urban and underserved communities face the greatest array of healthcare problems including the need to improve the quality of care provided them, disproportionate levels of poverty among different groups in the U.S., and the number of unhealthy people disproportionately represented by mostly African American and Hispanic populations. Academic medical centers (AMCs) are major community stakeholders who work to fulfill the increasing healthcare demands of underserved communities. With the tripartite mission of delivering high quality care to patients, undertaking clinical and laboratory research, and training future health professionals, AMCs have a unique ability to address health concerns of the most vulnerable populations. Innovations in healthcare technology are critical to ensure that AMCs properly address health disparities and the specific health concerns of rapidly growing African American populations. Awareness of these disparities may lead to improved processes and protocol implementation, which can promote innovation and quality improvement to allow AMCs to remain a key player in addressing population-based clinical research, quality of care, and health disparities nationwide.

Communication about Drug-Related Problems (DRPs) during Patients' Visits to Dutch Physicians and Pharmacies

The objective of this study is to assess the frequency and type of drug-related problems (DRPs) (1) raised and discussed (2) raised but not discussed or (3) not raised during patients' visits to healthcare practitioners (HCPs). In this cross-sectional study in Dutch outpatient clinics, GP practices and pharmacies, verbal cues from patients and HCPs indicating DRPs were inventoried by an observer during visits. It was also observed whether raised DRPs were discussed between patient and HCP. Post-encounter interviews (HCPs) were conducted and post-encounter questionnaires (patient) were distributed to identify DRPs not raised. In total, 431 patients were observed during a single visit. In 42.2% of these visits, 311 DRPs were raised (weighted mean (SD) 0.7 (±1.1) DRP/patient). Of these 311 DRPs, 82.0% were discussed between HCP and patient. HCPs did not raise existing DRPs in 3.9% of the 431 visits; in 6.3% of the 176 questionnaires the patient reported an existing DRP that had not been raised. In conclusion, almost one in six of the DRPs raised during visits are not discussed between HCP and patient. Furthermore, existing DRPs are not even raised in 4-6% of the visits. HCPs and patients should be aware that, although patients often have DRPs, these are not always discussed or not even raised during patients' visits.

How do physiotherapists solicit and explore patients' concerns in back pain consultations: a conversation analytic approach

Background: Guidelines advocate that non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) be considered within a multi-dimensional bio-psychosocial (BPS) framework. This BPS approach advocates incorporating the patient's perspective as part of the treatment process. 'Agenda setting' has been introduced as the key to understanding patients' concerns in medical encounters; however, this has received little attention in physiotherapy. This study explored how physiotherapists solicit and respond to the agenda of concerns that patients with NSCLBP bring to initial encounters. Method: The research setting was primary care. Twenty initial physiotherapy consultations were video-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using conversation analysis, a qualitative observational method. Both verbal and non-verbal features of the interaction were considered. Results: This data highlights a spectrum of communication styles ranging from more physiotherapist-focused, where the physiotherapists did not attend to patients' concerns, to a more patient-focused style, which provided greater opportunities for patients to voice their concerns. On occasions, patients were willing to pursue their own agenda when their concern was initially overlooked. Conclusion: This study provides empirical evidence on communication patterns in physiotherapy practice. A more collaborative style of communication with a shared conversational agenda provided patients with the conversational space to describe their concerns more fully.

Process for developing a culturally informed brief motivational intervention

The present study culturally enhances a standard brief intervention for alcohol use. Through an iterative process engaging key stakeholders; including patients, and expert consultants, this research sought to enhance current evidence based interventions. Five culturally informed enhancements consistent with Motivational Interviewing were introduced into standard brief interventions. These culturally informed enhancements can be refined to address the cultural risk and protective factors of other priority populations. The distinctions and advantages of this approach over prior cultural adapted interventions is discussed. Importantly, the present study outlines a process for refining the culturally informed brief intervention to other target populations.

When and how do surgeons initiate noticings of additional concerns?

OBJECTIVE

Physicians are trained on how to best solicit additional concerns from patients. What has not yet been studied is when and how physicians initiate additional concerns. This analysis focuses on when and how general surgeons share their noticings of medical problems unrelated to the upcoming (or recent) procedures that patients are being seen for.

METHODS

281 video-recorded medical encounters with 95 patients from a rural Texas (USA) general surgery private practice were reviewed for surgeon noticings of additional concerns. In addition to analyzing the videos using Conversation Analysis, the author conducted 9 months of ethnographic research to gain understanding of the local setting.

RESULTS

22 cases of surgeon noticings were found in 17 visits and were typically detected during the physical examination. Surgeons shared noticings adjacent to their discovery and predominantly framed noticings as bad news tellings. This framing helped mitigate 4 dilemmas surgeons encountered: unknown patient awareness of concern, surgeons' rights to assess areas unrelated to upcoming (or recent) procedures, not meeting the desired health optimization outcome & putting additional burden on patients, and other contextual factors specific to the visit that make sharing a noticing difficult. In addition to alerting patients and potentially activating earlier treatment, sharing noticings can also function to help build physician-patient relationships across time and curtail future patient worry.

IMPLICATIONS

Each surgeon noticing is potentially a concern that may have otherwise remained undetected and untreated, and speaks to the importance of physicians taking time to conduct thorough physical examinations.

Does Patient-centered Care Change Genital Surgery Decisions? The Strategic Use of Clinical Uncertainty in Disorders of Sex Development Clinics

Genital surgery in children with ambiguous or atypical genitalia has been marred by controversies about the appropriateness and timing of surgery, generating clinical uncertainty about decision making. Since 2006, medical experts and patient advocates have argued for putting the child's needs central as patient-centered care. Based on audio recordings of 31 parent-clinician interactions in three clinics of disorders of sex development, we analyze how parents and clinicians decide on genital surgery. We find that clinicians and parents aim for parent-centered rather than infant-centered care. Parents receive ambivalent messages about surgery: while clinicians express caution, they also present the surgery as beneficial. We examine how parents and clinicians reach agreement about surgery-differentiating parents who push strongly for surgery from parents who do not express any preconceived preferences about surgery and parents who resist surgery. We conclude that clinicians use clinical uncertainty about surgery strategically to direct parents toward perceived clinically appropriate decisions.

Patient-initiated additional concerns in general surgery visits

OBJECTIVE

To understand how and when patients initiate additional concerns in general surgery visits.

METHODS

175 video-recorded visits of a general surgery practice in rural Texas were collected, coded, and analyzed using Conversation analysis.

RESULTS

Patients initiated 377 additional concerns, with 2 or more concerns raised in 80 visits, and 1 concern raised in 37 visits. Three methods of initiation were identified: fitted-to-topic (66%), fitted-to-activity (14%), and disjunctive (20%). Sixty percent of patient-initiated concerns occurred i) before the physical examination, compared to 14% after the physical exam, and ii) in pre-operative visits.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the research on acute, primary care visits, patients in general surgery visits do not wait to present "door knob concerns." Instead, patients in general surgery visits are more likely to initiate concerns early in the visit. Patients most frequently find and create opportunities to introduce new concerns by fitting them to the ongoing talk or activity.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians should spend more time on the physical exam, as this phase creates a unique opportunity for patients to initiate concerns.

Findings from a feasibility study to improve GP elicitation of patient concerns in UK general practice consultations

OBJECTIVES

To establish: a) feasibility of training GPs in a communication intervention to solicit additional patient concerns early in the consultation, using specific lexical formulations ("do you have 'any' vs. 'some' other concerns?") noting the impact on consultation length, and b) whether patients attend with multiple concerns and whether they voiced them in the consultation.

METHODS

A mixed-methods three arm RCT feasibility study to assess the feasibility of the communication intervention.

RESULTS

Intervention fidelity was high. GPs can be trained to solicit additional concerns early in the consultation (once patients have presented their first concern). Whilst feasible the particular lexical variation of 'any' vs 'some' seemed to have no bearing on the number of patient concerns elicited, on consultation length or on patient satisfaction. The level of missing questionnaire data was low, suggesting patients found completion of questionnaires acceptable.

CONCLUSION

GPs can solicit for additional concerns without increasing consultation length, but the particular wording, specifically 'any' vs. 'some' may not be as important as the placement of the GP solicitation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

GPs can solicit early for additional concerns and GPs can establish patients' additional concerns in the opening of the consultation, which can help to plan and prioritise patients multiple concerns.

Electronic patient agenda forms: comparing agreement between the reason for specialty consultation reported by referring providers and patients

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the agreement between referring providers' reason for specialty evaluation and patients' understanding of why they are referred for consultation. Here, we compared the reason for consult (RFC) documented by referring providers during usual care vs. the perceived RFC independently reported by patients through an e-portal just prior to the specialist visit.

METHODS

We performed an observational study among patients referred for gastrointestinal (GI) evaluation. Patients referred to the specialty clinic submitted their self-reported RFC using an online patient agenda form prior to their visit. Therefore, each participant had a referring provider- and patient-documented RFC. Blinded physicians reviewed the RFCs in random order using a priori coding criteria. We then compared whether the provider and patient RFC pairs were concordant (i.e., ≥1 clinical topic[s] in the RFCs matched).

RESULTS

Sixty patients completed the e-portal prior to their visit, leading to 60 provider-patient RFC pairs. The RFC pairs were concordant in only 52% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

There is poor agreement between referring providers' reason for GI referral and patients' understanding of why they are visiting the clinic. Future research examining whether electronic patient agenda forms impact diagnostic and management precision, patient satisfaction, and healthcare utilization is warranted.

Patient priorities and the doorknob phenomenon in primary care: Can technology improve disclosure of patient stressors?

OBJECTIVE

Patients with multiple chronic conditions face many stressors (e.g. financial, safety, transportation stressors) that are rarely prioritized for discussion with the primary care provider (PCP). In this pilot randomized controlled trial we examined the effects of a novel technology-based intervention called Customized Care on stressor disclosure.

METHODS

The main outcomes were stressor disclosure, patient confidence and activation, as assessed by self-report and observational methods (transcribed and coded audio-recordings of the office visit).

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled. Compared with care as usual, intervention patients were 6 times more likely to disclose stressors to the PCP (OR=6.16, 95% CI [1.53, 24.81], p=0.011) and reported greater stressor disclosure confidence (exp[B]=1.06, 95% CI [1.01, 1.12], p=0.028). No differences were found in patient activation or the length of the office visit.

CONCLUSION

Customized Care improved the likelihood of stressor disclosure without affecting the length of the PCP visit.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Brief technology-based interventions, like Customized Care could be made available through patient portals, or on smart phones, to prime patient-PCP discussion about difficult subjects, thereby improving the patient experience and efficiency of the visit.

"I've just never gotten around to doing it": Men's approaches to managing BRCA-related cancer risks

OBJECTIVE

To examine men's approaches to managing BRCA-related cancer risks.

METHODS

25 Qualitative interviews were conducted with men who are at risk for BRCA-related cancers. Thematic analysis was conducted using the constant comparison.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis revealed two different approaches for how men managed their BRCA-related cancer risks. Men were engaged when: (1) initially seeking information, (2) uptake of genetic testing, and (3) population screening procedures. Men were passively avoidant for: (1) follow-up information seeking, (2) uptake of genetic testing, and (3) BRCA-specific screening. Men's justifications for engaged risk management were to: (1) protect their family, (2) respond to encouragement from others, and (3) get knowledge for themselves. Their justifications for passively avoidant management were due to: (1) limited access to clear risk information, (2) little fear of cancer development, (3) barriers to testing/screening, and (4) reliance on incomplete illness representations.

CONCLUSIONS

Men at risk for developing BRCA-related cancers approached risk management by primarily using a passive avoidance approach. That approach should be interpreted in context with the inconsistent information available to them, and the minimal NCCN guidelines for their risk surveillance.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings may assist healthcare providers and family members in helping men manage their BRCA-related cancer risks.

Managing risk and patient involvement in choosing treatment for cancer: an analysis of two communication practices

Drawing on conversation analyses of oncology consultations collected in Italy, the article examines the communication practices used to recommend treatments. We found that the oncologist formulates the treatment recommendation (TR) for high-risk patients in terms of a 'mandatory' choice and for low-risk patients as an 'optional' type of decision. In the first case the doctor presses to reach a decision during the visit while in the second case leaves the decision open-ended. Results show that high-risk patients have less time to decide, are pressured towards choosing an option, but have more opportunities for involvement in TR during the visit. Low-risk patients instead have more time and autonomy to make a choice, but they are also less involved in the decision-making in the visit time. Moreover, we document that TR is organised through sequential activities in which the oncologist informs the patient of alternative therapeutic options while at the same time building a case for the kind of treatment she/he believes to be best for the patient's health. We suggest that in this field risk plays a key role in decision-making which should be better understood with further studies and taken into account in the debate on shared decision-making and patient-centred communication.

Should I stay or should I go? How healthcare professionals close encounters with people with dementia in the acute hospital setting

Around a quarter of hospital beds in the UK are occupied by patients living with dementia (PWD), and communication impairments are common across all types of dementia, often exacerbated by the hospital environment. Unsurprisingly, healthcare professionals (HCPs) report particular challenges in caring for this patient group, whilst trying to recognise and value their personhood as per the underpinning ethos of person-centred care. However, whilst there is a growing body of research that underlines the importance of communication in dementia care, there is far less that actually examines this communication in real time interaction. Suggestions and pointers for good communication do exist, but these do not tend to be empirically derived, and sometimes conflict with empirical findings. This paper focuses on a specific area of interaction which has previously received very little attention: the way in which healthcare encounters are ended or closed. There is potentially a conflict between a pressure to manage a patient as efficiently as possible, and endeavouring to ensure person-centred care and deal with communication difficulties arising from dementia. Using conversation analysis, we examined forty-one video recordings of HCP/PWD interactions collected from an acute inpatient ward. We identify three phenomena around which there were recurring troubles in our dataset: ‘open-ended pre-closings’, ‘mixed messages’ and ‘non specifics and indeterminate terms’. We conclude that moves towards closing an encounter that appear intuitive to HCPs as competent interactants, and that may represent best practice in other healthcare settings, may in fact serve to confuse a PWD and create difficulties with closings. Our findings underline the importance of examining best practice guidance as it is actually talked into being, using approaches which can unpack the interactional detail involved. They also emphasise the importance of context in the analysis of healthcare delivery, to avoid a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

•

Closing care encounters with PWD can be particularly challenging for staff in acute care.

•

Using conversation analysis to examine video recordings highlights recurring issues.

•

Standard ‘person-centred’ moves towards closing may be inappropriate for PWD.

•

Some standard closing practices may be too subtle or ambiguous for PWD to orient to.

•

Tensions arise for HCPs between assuming competency and allowing for impairment.

Any questions? Yes, do pharmacists monitor medications at refill?

OBJECTIVES

To describe pharmacists' self-reported refill monitoring activities and test for demographic and work setting differences that contribute to variation.

METHODS

This study used a cross-sectional survey design. A 4-contact survey was mailed to 599 community pharmacists randomly selected from a list provided by the state board of pharmacy. Surveys were mailed in June and July 2013. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance were used to characterize these data.

RESULTS

Of the 599 surveys mailed, 269 complete responses were received for a 44.9% response rate. Pharmacists reported reviewing the patient's medication profile for 40% of refills. Of the 29% of refills handed off, pharmacists asked 70% of patients if they had any questions and 23% a specific question about drug therapy. Pharmacists at mass merchandisers and those in smaller towns were least likely to examine the profile, whereas pharmacists working at independent stores, owners, and pharmacists with a BS Pharm degree were most likely to hand off refills to patients. Demographic and work-setting characteristics factors were not associated with the rate of asking specific questions about the patient's drug therapy, although pharmacists with a BS Pharm, at an independent store, or working in the smallest towns were least likely to ask "Any questions?" when handing off the prescription.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists reported reviewing patient profiles, handing off prescriptions, and asking medication-specific questions to fewer than one-half of patients picking up refills. Pharmacists were more likely to inquire if patients had any questions than to ask specific questions, and other researchers have reported that the former phrasing may inadvertently serve to reduce patient engagement.

The influence of contextual factors on patient involvement during follow-up consultations after colorectal cancer surgery: a case study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To identify the contextual factors that influence individual patient involvement during colorectal cancer surgical follow-up consultations.

BACKGROUND

The healthcare system is subject to the requirement and expectation of greater involvement of patients and relatives. Increased patient involvement requires the development and implementation of new communication initiatives. Research shows that it is also necessary to consider the contextual circumstances surrounding patient involvement in specific situations.

DESIGN

Case study of a single Danish outpatient clinic, which allows the issues and circumstances involved in an everyday situation to be captured.

METHOD

12 nonparticipative observations of outpatient visits and, subsequently, seven in-depth patient interviews.

ANALYSIS

Content analysis based on a dialogical, interactive framework, which underpinned the identification of current contextual factors.

RESULTS

The results showed five contextual factors that seemed to have an impact on patient involvement. The first, 'Two dimensions of patient involvement: treatment-oriented and person-oriented' highlighted a dual interpretation of patient involvement in the consultation situation. The two dimensions seemed to be influenced by four additional factors: 'Doctors leading the agenda', 'Traditional health professional roles', 'Unclear responsibilities' and 'Guidance primarily focused on treatment'.

CONCLUSION

The results showed how patient involvement in clinical practice could be understood as a two-way movement, in which patients are invited to participate in clinical practice, while health professionals are invited to participate in the patients' lives. The movement will change from situation to situation and is influenced by several contextual factors.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The results can help doctors and nurses to navigate using a goal-oriented approach towards patient involvement. The study makes visible the need for research-based development of the independent role of the nursing profession in cancer care follow-up, with a view to enhanced patient-centred care.

Building trust and rapport early in the new doctor-patient relationship: a longitudinal qualitative study

BACKGROUND

New patients are a particularly vulnerable population because they are at high risk of missing a subsequent visit or dropping out of care completely. However, few data exist on what new patients value in the beginning of a relationship with a new provider. Persons with HIV infection may be an ideal population to study the drivers of a positive initial patient-provider relationship, as it is a chronic and serious condition that requires a reliable, ongoing relationship with a provider. Informed by patients' real experiences, this study aims to identify what patients see as the most critical elements for building trust and rapport from the outset.

METHODS

We conducted longitudinal, in-person interviews with 21 patients new to the HIV clinic at the Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Houston, Texas, from August 2013 to March 2015. Patients were interviewed across three time points: once before their first provider visit, a second time within two weeks after the first visit, and a third time at 6 to 12 months after the first provider visit.

RESULTS

We conducted 61 h of patient interviews. The mean age was 53 years; 52% were non-Hispanic white, 23% were non-Hispanic black and 19% were Hispanic. Patients described significant anxiety and vulnerability not just from HIV itself, but also in starting a relationship as a new patient to a new provider. Our analysis of these experiences revealed five actions providers can take to reduce their patients' anxiety and build trust early in the first visit: 1) provide reassurance to patients, 2) tell patients it's okay to ask questions, 3) show patients their lab results and explain what they mean, 4) avoid language and behaviors that are judgmental of patients, and 5) ask patients what they want [i.e., treatment goals and preferences].

CONCLUSIONS

Our study incorporates direct input from patients and highlights the unique psychological challenges that patients face in seeking care from a new provider. The actionable opportunities cited by patients have the potential to mitigate patients' feelings of anxiety and vulnerability, and thereby improve their overall health care experience.