1
|
Blease CR, Kharko A, Dong Z, Jones RB, Davidge G, Hagglund M, Turner A, DesRoches C, McMillan B. Experiences and opinions of general practitioners with patient online record access: an online survey in England. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e078158. [PMID: 38302414 PMCID: PMC10806584 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 12/22/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To describe the experiences and opinions of general practitioners (GPs) in England regarding patients having access to their full online GP health records. DESIGN Convenience sample, online survey. PARTICIPANTS 400 registered GPs in England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Investigators measured GPs' experiences and opinions about online record access (ORA), including patient care and their practice. RESULTS A total of 400 GPs from all regions of England responded. A minority (130, 33%) believed ORA was a good idea. Most GPs believed a majority of patients would worry more (364, 91%) or find their GP records more confusing than helpful (338, 85%). Most GPs believed a majority of patients would find significant errors in their records (240, 60%), would better remember their care plan (280, 70%) and feel more in control of their care (243, 60%). The majority believed they will/already spend more time addressing patients' questions outside of consultations (357, 89%), that consultations will/already take significantly longer (322, 81%) and that they will be/already are less candid in their documentation (289, 72%) after ORA. Nearly two-thirds of GPs believed ORA would increase their litigation (246, 62%). CONCLUSIONS Similar to clinicians in other countries, GPs in our sample were sceptical of ORA, believing patients would worry more and find their records more confusing than helpful. Most GPs also believed the practice would exacerbate work burdens. However, the majority of GPs in this survey also agreed there were multiple benefits to patients having online access to their primary care health records. The findings of this survey also contribute to a growing body of contrastive research from countries where ORA is advanced, demonstrating clinicians are sceptical while studies indicate patients appear to derive multiple benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Anna Kharko
- Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
- Department of Women and Children's Health, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Zhiyong Dong
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Ray B Jones
- Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Gail Davidge
- Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Maria Hagglund
- Department of Women and Children's Health, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala, Sweden
- Medtech Science & Innovation Centre, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | - Catherine DesRoches
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Brian McMillan
- Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
ABSTRACT In the last decade, many health organizations have embarked on a revolution in clinical communication. Using electronic devices, patients can now gain rapid access to their online clinical records. Legally, patients in many countries already have the right to obtain copies of their health records; however, the practice known as "open notes" is different. Via secure online health portals, patients are now able to access their test results, lists of medications, and the very words that clinicians write about them. Open notes are growing with most patients in the Nordic countries already offered access to their full electronic record. From April 2021, a new federal ruling in the United States mandates-with few exemptions-that providers offer patients access to their online notes (Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, Department of Health and Human Services, Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-03-04/pdf/2019-02224.pdf#page=99). Against these policy changes, only limited attention has been paid to the ethical question about whether patients with mental health conditions should access their notes, as mentioned in the articles by Strudwick, Yeung, and Gratzer (Front Psychiatry 10:917, 2019) and Blease, O'Neill, Walker, Hägglund, and Torous (Lancet Psychiatry 7:924-925, 2020). In this article, our goal is to motivate further inquiry into opening mental health notes to patients, particularly among persons with serious mental illness and those accessing psychological treatments. Using biomedical ethical principles to frame our discussion, we identify key empirical questions that must be pursued to inform ethical practice guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Maria Hagglund
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blease CR, O'Neill S, Walker J, Hägglund M, Torous J. Sharing notes with mental health patients: balancing risks with respect. Lancet Psychiatry 2020; 7:924-925. [PMID: 32059796 DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30032-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2019] [Revised: 12/18/2019] [Accepted: 01/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- OpenNotes, Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - Stephen O'Neill
- OpenNotes, Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Jan Walker
- OpenNotes, Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Maria Hägglund
- OpenNotes, Division of General Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - John Torous
- Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
National surveys of primary care physicians demonstrate that placebo use is prevalent. Against their widespread use, until recently, it was assumed among researchers that placebos must be deceptively prescribed for beneficial effects to be elicited. However, a new programme of research in placebo studies indicates that it may be possible to harness placebo effects in clinical practice via ethical, non-deceptively prescribed 'open label placebos' ('OLPs'). To date, there have been 14 small scale clinical and experimental trials into OLPs. Results suggest therapeutic potential of these treatments for a range of conditions and symptoms. In this evidence-based Analysis we identify conceptual issues that, if not given due consideration, risk undermining research methodologies in OLP trials. Counterintuitively, owing to the nuances posed by placebo terminology, and the difficulties of designing placebos controls in OLP trials, we suggest that experimentalists reflect more deeply when formulating adequate comparison groups. Further research is needed to disentangle which specific components of OLPs are effective, such as: the rationale provided to participants; the quality of provider interaction; and/or the action of taking the pills. We conclude with recommendations for how researchers might take up the significant challenge of devising optimal placebo controls for OLP clinical trials. Although these issues are intricate, they are not merely academic: without due diligence to conceptual, and as a consequence, methodological considerations, OLP effect sizes may be over- or underestimated. We conclude that there may yet be potential to use OLPs in medical practice but clinical translation depends on rigorously controlled research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- Program in Placebo Studies, Department of General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Michael H. Bernstein
- School of Public Health, Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Cosima Locher
- Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Blease CR, Delbanco T, Torous J, Ponten M, DesRoches CM, Hagglund M, Walker J, Kirsch I. Sharing clinical notes, and placebo and nocebo effects: Can documentation affect patient health? J Health Psychol 2020; 27:135-146. [PMID: 32772861 DOI: 10.1177/1359105320948588] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper connects findings from the field of placebo studies with research into patients' interactions with their clinician's visit notes, housed in their electronic health records. We propose specific hypotheses about how features of clinicians' written notes might trigger mechanisms of placebo and nocebo effects to elicit positive or adverse health effects among patients. Bridging placebo studies with (a) survey data assaying patient and clinician experiences with portals and (b) randomized controlled trials provides preliminary support for our hypotheses. We conclude with actionable proposals for testing our understanding of the health effects of access to visit notes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tom Delbanco
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - John Torous
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Catherine M DesRoches
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Maria Hagglund
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Jan Walker
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Irving Kirsch
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bernstein MH, Locher C, Stewart-Ferrer S, Buergler S, DesRoches CM, Dossett ML, Miller FG, Grose D, Blease CR. Primary care providers' use of and attitudes towards placebos: An exploratory focus group study with US physicians. Br J Health Psychol 2020; 25:596-614. [PMID: 32472982 DOI: 10.1111/bjhp.12429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2020] [Revised: 04/24/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine how primary care physicians define placebo concepts, use placebos in clinical practice, and view open-label placebos (OLPs). DESIGN Semi-structured focus groups that were audio-recorded and content-coded. METHODS Two focus groups with a total of 15 primary care physicians occurred at medical centres in the New England region of the United States. Prior experience using placebo treatments and attitudes towards open-label placebos were explored. Themes were analysed using an inductive data-driven approach. RESULTS Physicians displayed a nuanced understanding of placebos and placebo effects in clinical contexts which sometimes focused on relational factors. Some respondents reported that they prescribed treatments with no known pharmacological effect for certain conditions and symptoms ('impure placebos') and that such prescriptions were more common for pain disorders, functional disorders, and medically unexplained symptoms. Opinions about OLP were mixed: Some viewed OLPs favourably or considered them 'harmless'; however, others strongly rejected OLPs as disrespectful to patients. Other issues in relation to OLPs included the following: lack of guidelines, legal and reputational concerns, and the notion that such treatments would run counter to customary medical practice. CONCLUSIONS A number of physicians reported prescribing impure placebos in clinical care. Although some primary care physicians were resistant to the possibility of recommending OLPs, others regarded OLPs more favourably, viewing them as potential treatments, albeit with restricted potential. Statement of contribution What is already known? Many physicians report prescribing drugs for the purposes of eliciting a placebo effect. Initial evidence for the efficacy of open-label placebos is promising. What does this study add? A more nuanced description of the circumstances under which primary care physicians report placebo prescribing. A qualitative account of physician attitudes about using open-label placebos in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael H Bernstein
- Department of Behavioral & Social Sciences, Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Cosima Locher
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, UK.,Division of Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Switzerland
| | - Sif Stewart-Ferrer
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Sarah Buergler
- Division of Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Switzerland
| | - Catherine M DesRoches
- General Medicine and Primary Care Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Michelle L Dossett
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Benson-Henry Institute for Mind Body Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Division of General Internal Medicine, Geriatrics & Bioethics, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA
| | - Franklin G Miller
- Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
| | - Deborah Grose
- Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Isreal Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Charlotte R Blease
- General Medicine and Primary Care Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Blease CR, Walker J, Torous J, O'Neill S. Sharing Clinical Notes in Psychotherapy: A New Tool to Strengthen Patient Autonomy. Front Psychiatry 2020; 11:527872. [PMID: 33192647 PMCID: PMC7655789 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.527872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2020] [Accepted: 09/22/2020] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jan Walker
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - John Torous
- Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Stephen O'Neill
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Blease CR, Arnott T, Kelley JM, Proctor G, Kube T, Gaab J, Locher C. Attitudes About Informed Consent: An Exploratory Qualitative Analysis of UK Psychotherapy Trainees. Front Psychiatry 2020; 11:183. [PMID: 32231601 PMCID: PMC7083167 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2019] [Accepted: 02/25/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Ethical informed consent to psychotherapy has recently been the subject of in-depth analysis among healthcare ethicists. Objective: This study aimed to explore counseling and psychotherapy students' views and understanding about informed consent to psychological treatments. Methods: Two focus groups were conducted with a total of 10 students enrolled in a Masters course in counseling and psychotherapy at a British university. Questions concerned participants' understanding of informed consent including judgments about client capacity; the kinds of information that should be disclosed; how consent might be obtained; and their experiences of informed consent, both as a client and as a therapist. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Coding was conducted independently by three authors. Results: Comments were classified into three main themes: (1) the reasons and justifications for informed consent; (2) informed consent processes; and (3) the hidden ethics curriculum. Some trainees expressed significant doubts about the importance of informed consent. However, participants also identified the need to establish the clients' voluntariness and their right to be informed about confidentiality issues. In general, the format and processes pertaining to informed consent raised considerable questions and uncertainties. Participants were unsure about rules surrounding client capacity; expressed misgivings about describing treatment techniques; and strikingly, most trainees were skeptical about the clinical relevance of the evidence-base in psychotherapy. Finally, trainees' experiences as clients within obligatory psychotherapy sessions were suggestive of a "hidden ethics curriculum"-referring to the unintended transmission of norms and practices within training that undermine the explicit guidance expressed in formal professional ethics codes. Some students felt coerced into therapy, and some reported not undergoing informed consent processes. Reflecting on work placements, trainees expressed mixed views, with some unclear about who was responsible for informed consent. Conclusions: This qualitative study presents timely information on psychotherapy students' views about informed consent to psychotherapy. Major gaps in students' ethical, conceptual, and procedural knowledge were identified, and comments suggested the influence of a hidden curriculum in shaping norms of practice. Implications: This exploratory study raises important questions about the preparedness of psychotherapy students to fulfill their ethical obligations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.,School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Tim Arnott
- School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - John M Kelley
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.,Department of Psychology, Endicott College, Beverly, MA, United States
| | - Gillian Proctor
- School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Tobias Kube
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.,Pain and Psychotherapy Lab, University of Koblenz and Landau, Landau, Germany
| | - Jens Gaab
- Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Cosima Locher
- Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.,School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Blease CR, Walker J, Torous J, O'Neill S. Corrigendum: Sharing Clinical Notes in Psychotherapy: A New Tool to Strengthen Patient Autonomy. Front Psychiatry 2020; 11:636411. [PMID: 33536954 PMCID: PMC7849277 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.636411] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.527872.].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jan Walker
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - John Torous
- Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Stephen O'Neill
- OpenNotes, General Medicine and Primary Care Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Blease CR, Bell SK. Patients as diagnostic collaborators: sharing visit notes to promote accuracy and safety. Diagnosis (Berl) 2019; 6:213-221. [DOI: 10.1515/dx-2018-0106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2018] [Accepted: 04/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Error resulting from missed, delayed, or wrong diagnoses is estimated to occur in 10–15% of ambulatory and inpatient encounters, leading to serious harm in around half of such cases. When it comes to conceptualizing diagnostic error, most research has focused on factors pertaining to: (a) physician cognition and (b) ergonomic or systems factors related to the physician’s working environment. A third factor – the role of patients in diagnostic processes – remains relatively under-investigated. Yet, as a growing number of researchers acknowledge, patients hold unique knowledge about themselves and their healthcare experience, and may be the most underutilized resource for mitigating diagnostic error. This opinion article examines recent findings from patient surveys about sharing visit notes with patients online. Drawing on these survey results, we suggest three ways in which sharing visit notes with patients might enhance diagnostic processes: (1) avoid delays and missed diagnoses by enhancing timely follow up of recommended tests, results, and referrals; (2) identify documentation errors that may undermine diagnostic accuracy; and (3) strengthen patient-clinician relationships thereby creating stronger bidirectional diagnostic partnerships. We also consider the potential pitfalls or unintended consequences of note transparency, and highlight areas in need of further research.
Collapse
|
11
|
Blease CR, Kelley JM. Does Disclosure About the Common Factors Affect Laypersons' Opinions About How Cognitive Behavioral Psychotherapy Works? Front Psychol 2018; 9:2635. [PMID: 30622498 PMCID: PMC6308208 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02635] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2018] [Accepted: 12/07/2018] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Written and online information about cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) prioritizes the role of specific techniques (e.g., cognitive restructuring) and typically omits discussion of “common factors” (e.g., the working alliance, or therapist empathy). However, according to extensive psychotherapy process research the common factors may be important mediators of client improvement. Objectives: This study aimed to assess lay opinions about the role of specific and common factors in CBT for depression. We also aimed to determine how different client disclosure processes might affect lay opinions about the relative importance of specific and common factors in CBT. Methods: We conducted a web-based experiment involving a sample of US participants who had never undergone psychotherapy. All participants were presented with similar vignettes describing an individual suffering from depression whose doctor recommends CBT. Participants were randomized to read one of six vignettes created in a 2 × 3 factorial design that crossed client gender with type of informed consent (Standard CBT Disclosure vs. Common Factors and CBT Disclosure vs. No Disclosure). Results: Disclosure type had a significant effect on participants' ratings of Common and Specific factors in psychotherapy. As compared to the CBT disclosure, participants allocated to the Common Factors disclosure rated Empathy and Positive Regard as significantly more important to treatment outcome, and rated the Specific factors of CBT as significantly less important to outcome. There were no significant differences between No Disclosure and Standard CBT Disclosure, and these participants rated Specific factors of CBT and the Working Alliance as more important components in treatment, and Empathy and Positive Regard as less important. Conclusions: The content of information disclosures influences lay opinions about the importance of specific and common factors in CBT. Further research should investigate ethically acceptable disclosures to CBT and other forms of psychotherapy, including whether disclosure practices affect treatment outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R Blease
- General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States.,School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - John M Kelley
- School of Psychology, Endicott College, Beverly, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R. Blease
- Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
- School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
Lack of knowledge about placebos affects participants’ understanding of trials and breaches the ethical obligations of researchers, argue C R Blease, F L Bishop, and T J Kaptchuk
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C R Blease
- School of Philosophy, University College Dublin, Ireland
- Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - F L Bishop
- Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, UK
| | - T J Kaptchuk
- Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Blease CR, Lilienfeld SO, Kelley JM. Evidence-Based Practice and Psychological Treatments: The Imperatives of Informed Consent. Front Psychol 2016; 7:1170. [PMID: 27559322 PMCID: PMC4979245 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2016] [Accepted: 07/22/2016] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte R. Blease
- Centre for Medical Humanities, University of LeedsLeeds, UK
- Program in Placebo Studies, Harvard Medical SchoolBoston, MA, USA
| | | | - John M. Kelley
- Program in Placebo Studies, Harvard Medical SchoolBoston, MA, USA
- Psychology, Endicott CollegeBeverly, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Blease CR. Talking more about talking cures: cognitive behavioural therapy and informed consent. J Med Ethics 2015; 41:750-755. [PMID: 25887514 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102641] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2014] [Accepted: 03/20/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has risen to prominence as an orthodox treatment option which is commonly recommended to patients with anxiety and depressive disorders. Mainstream healthcare institutions (including the National Health Service in the UK (NHS) and National Institute for Mental Health (NIMH)) assume that CBT works by helping patients to challenge and overcome 'faulty cognition'. Even if we accept the empirical evidence which shows that CBT (like other forms of psychotherapy) is a beneficial treatment there are still problems with this therapy: mainstream medicine and psychotherapy are continuing to ignore established research that CBT does not work according to its core theoretical tenets. This paper presents evidence that psychotherapy is entrenched in such conventional 'wisdom' and that practitioners are failing to meet their own codified requirement of informed consent. I examine ethical arguments for and against upholding current informed consent procedures and focus, in particular, on the relationship between respect for patient autonomy and the duty of beneficence. I argue that (so far) there are no strong grounds for the claim that patient autonomy undermines therapeutic outcome. The modest conclusion of this paper is that psychotherapy (including CBT) needs to begin to adapt informed consent procedures to comply with ongoing scientific research into its efficacy.
Collapse
|