From Vulnerability to Disclosure: A Normative Approach to Understanding Trust in Obstetric and Intrapartum Nurse-Patient Communication

Collaborative Communication: A Qualitative Study of Roles and Emphases of Health Care Providers in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Purpose

Clinical nursing in obstetrics and gynecology is a technically demanding job. Doctors and nurses have different professional backgrounds and work priorities, and there are differences in communication modes, which can easily lead to poor communication between medical staff and their patients. Therefore this study aims to examine the different communication roles and emphases of obstetrician and gynecologists, nurses and midwives in different sections of SEGUE framework, and further navigate the effectiveness and differences of offline and online provider-patient communication.

Participants and Methods

This study employs in-depth interviews to address the research questions. A total of 24 health care providers, including 8 doctors, 5 midwives and 11 nurses, were interviewed face-to-face or by telephone.

Results

Doctors pay more attention to the "giving information" stage, while nurses pay more attention to "set the stage" and "elicit information" steps. Midwives and nurses spend more time with patients before and after labor. In addition to information giving, they also accommodate the "understand the patient's perspective" and "end the encounter" steps. Nurses and midwives would attach greater importance to "understanding of patients' perspective". Online medical consultation is more convenient for patients, which can be used as a follow-up complement to offline medical consultation.

Conclusion

The health care providers of different types in obstetrics and gynecology communicate collaboratively with patients, highlighting the equally important role of midwives and nurses when communicating with patients. Nurses focus on "set the stage" and "elicit information" stage. Midwife is another important information source and medical care provider, especially for pregnant women in stable conditions. Nutrition clinic of midwife could be recommended for hospitals in second- and third-tier cities, which could help to alleviate obstetricians' workload. The provision of an online collaborative consultation could be beneficial supplement after face-to-face doctor-patient communication.

Epistemic Trust as an Interactional Accomplishment in Pediatric Well-Child Visits: Parents' Resistance to Solicited Advice as Performing Epistemic Vigilance

Epistemic trust - i.e. the belief in knowledge claims we do not understand or cannot validate - is pivotal in healthcare interactions where trust in the source of knowledge is the foundation for adherence to therapy as well as general compliance with the physician's suggestions. However, in the contemporary knowledge society professionals can no longer count on unconditional epistemic trust: boundaries of the legitimacy and extension criteria of expertise have become increasingly fuzzier and professionals must take into account laypersons' expertise. Drawing on a conversation analysis-informed study of 23 videorecorded pediatrician-led well-child visits, the article deals with the communicative constitution of healthcare-relevant phenomena such as: epistemic and deontic struggles between parents and pediatricians, the local accomplishment of (responsible) epistemic trust, and the possible outcomes of blurred boundaries between the layperson's and the professional's "expertise." In particular, we illustrate how epistemic trust is communicatively built in sequences where parents request the pediatrician's advice and resist it. The analysis shows how parents perform epistemic vigilance by suspending the immediate acceptance of the pediatrician's advice in favor of inserting expansions that make it relevant for the pediatrician to account for her advice. Once the pediatrician has addressed parents' concerns, parents perform (delayed) acceptance, which we assume indexes what we call responsible epistemic trust. While acknowledging the advantages of what seems to be a cultural change in parent-healthcare provider encounters, in the conclusion we advance that possible risks are implied in contemporary fuzziness of the legitimacy and extension criteria of expertise in doctor-patient interaction.

Family centered nursing practices towards women and their families in the birthing context: A qualitative systematic review

AIM

Synthesize qualitative evidence examining how nurses' attitudes, beliefs, and sense of efficacy and the context surrounding birth facilitate or hinder family-centered nursing practice.

DESIGN

Thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, SCIENCE DIRECT, REPÈRES, CAIRN, and ÉRUDIT from October 2020 to June 2021. The PRISMA guidelines were followed, and studies were critically appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers, and Thomas and Harden's qualitative thematic synthesis method was performed for data analysis.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. Three analytical themes were generated: (1) sharing power: opposing beliefs, (2) feeling a sense of efficacy in fulfilling one's role, and (3) managing a challenging work environment.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Synthesizing nurses' experience is essential to promote implementation of favourable changes for care that is more focused on the needs of families.

Using Normative Rhetorical Theory to Identify Dilemmas and Responses in Internal Medicine Patient-Provider Communication

Drawing on normative rhetorical theory (NRT), we examined communication dilemmas that internal medicine residents (IMRs) experience when interacting with patients and responses they adopt to manage these dilemmas. We conducted semi-structured, intensive interviews with 15 IMRs and analyzed the data using the phronetic iterative approach. Findings suggested that IMRs experienced two interpersonal dilemmas: (a) asserting expertise while respecting patients and (b) discussing patient behaviors without indicating deviance. The two dilemmas were more salient for international IMRs who were less familiar with the local culture and embraced a different perspective of the IMR-patient relationship. The two interpersonal dilemmas were connected to a supra-level dilemma of practicing tasks required by evidence-based medicine while being patient-centered. IMRs reported engaging in an interpretive lens to view patients as "people" and communicative responses to manage the dilemmas. By applying NRT to a novel context, our findings demonstrate the impact of macro-level paradigms on IMRs' conflicting purposes in medical encounters and offer practical implications for communication interventions for IMRs.