Developing and validating the Unhurried Conversations Assessment Tool (UCAT)

OBJECTIVE

Given the importance of unhurried conversations for providing careful and kind care, we sought to create, test, and validate the Unhurried Conversations Assessment Tool (UCAT) for assessing the unhurriedness of patient-clinician consultations.

METHODS

In the first two phases, the unhurried conversation dimensions were identified and transformed into an assessment tool. In the third phase, two independent raters used UCAT to evaluate the unhurriedness of 100 randomly selected consultations from 184 videos recorded for a large research trial. UCAT's psychometric properties were evaluated using this data.

RESULTS

UCAT demonstrates content validity based on the literature and expert review. EFA and reliability analyses confirm its construct validity and internal consistency. The seven formative dimensions account for 89.93% of the variance in unhurriedness, each displaying excellent internal consistency (α > 0.90). Inter-rater agreement for the overall assessment item was fair (ICC = 0.59), with individual dimension ICCs ranging from 0.26 (poor) to 0.95 (excellent).

CONCLUSION

UCAT components comprehensively assess the unhurriedness of consultations. The tool exhibits content and construct validity and can be used reliably.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

UCAT's design and psychometric properties make it a practical and efficient tool. Clinicians can use it for self-evaluations and training to foster unhurried conversations.

Clinician feedback using a shared decision-making tool for the evaluation of patients with thyroid nodules-an observational study

BACKGROUND

We pilot-tested an encounter conversation aid to support shared decision making (SDM) between patients with thyroid nodules and their clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize the clinician feedback after providing care to patients with thyroid nodules using a tool to promote SDM conversations during the clinical encounter, and evaluate how clinicians used the tool during the visit.

METHODS

Mixed method study in two academic centers in the U.S., including adult patients presenting for evaluation of thyroid nodules and their clinicians. We thematically analyzed interviews with clinicians after they used the SDM tool in at least three visits to characterize their feedback. Additionally, investigators evaluated visits recordings to determine the extent to which clinicians engaged patients in the decision-making process (OPTION score, scale 0 to 100, higher levels indicating higher involvement), the tool's components used (fidelity), and encounter duration. Using a post-visit survey, we evaluated the extent to which clinicians felt the tool was easy to use, helpful, and supportive of the patient-clinician collaboration.

RESULTS

Thirteen clinicians participated in the study and used the SDM tool in the care of 53 patients. Clinicians thought the tool was well-organized and beneficial to patients and clinicians. Clinicians noticed a change in their routine with the use of the conversation aid and suggested it needed to be more flexible to better support varying conversations. The median OPTION score was 34, the fidelity of use 75%, and the median visit duration 17 min. In most encounters, clinicians agreed or strongly agreed the tool was easy to use (86%), helpful (65%), and supported collaboration (62%).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians were able to use a SDM tool in the care of patients with thyroid nodules. Although they wished it were more flexible, they found on the whole that its use in the clinical encounter was beneficial to patients and clinicians.