Literature DB >> 11999499

Communicative competence in the delivery of bad news.

Cathy Gillotti1, Teresa Thompson, Kelly McNeilis.   

Abstract

Grounded in the Cegala and Waldron (Communication Studies 43 (1992) 105) model of communicative competence, the present study applied the McNeilis (Health Communication 13 (2001) 5) provider-patient coding scheme to video tapes of 3rd year medical students delivering bad news to a standardized patient. The goal of the study was to understand the specific communicative moves that are associated with perceptions of competence during bad news delivery. The coding scheme assesses Content, Acknowledgment Tokens, Interruptions, Alignment, and Function of the message. Naïve observers also evaluated the tapes on several items, assessing empathy and communicative effectiveness. Nonmedical talk was the most common type of content, followed by discussion of the current health problem. Neither acknowledgment tokens nor interruptions were frequent. The most common function of a message was a closed question, followed by explanations, assertions, and open questions. Summing across the functions indicated that information giving was the nost common behavior. The perceivers' data showed fairly neutral assessments of the medical students--they were generally not evaluated very positively, although they were not disliked. Regression analyses indicated numerous specific communicative behaviors that were associated with judgments of competence. Statements falling into the Nonspecific Content category were associated with more positive perceptions, while relational statements, moderately closed questions, solicited answers, expansions, restatements, assertions, explanations, open questions, bracketing, and small talk as well as information verifying, seeking, and giving (summed functions) led to more negative perceptions. The results indicate that the delivery of bad news requires communicative moves that differ from other kinds of medical communication. Depending on the results of future analyses of this topic health are providers may be well advised to focus little of their communication information seeking, giving, or verifying during the initial lab news delivery consultation, but rather to save most communication information for a follow-up scheduled shortly afterwards.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11999499     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(01)00073-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  9 in total

1.  How healthcare provider talk with parents of children following severe traumatic brain injury is perceived in early acute care.

Authors:  Cecelia I Roscigno; Teresa A Savage; Gerald Grant; Gerry Philipsen
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2013-04-28       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  A comprehensive observational coding scheme for analyzing instrumental, affective, and relational communication in health care contexts.

Authors:  Laura A Siminoff; Mary M Step
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2011-02

3.  Patient-centered communication during the disclosure of a dementia diagnosis.

Authors:  Alexandra K Zaleta; Brian D Carpenter
Journal:  Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 2.035

4.  Informed decision making in advance care planning: concordance of patient self-reported diagnosis with physician diagnosis.

Authors:  Jane R Schubart; Lisa Toran; Megan Whitehead; Benjamin H Levi; Michael J Green
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Parent perceptions of early prognostic encounters following children's severe traumatic brain injury: 'locked up in this cage of absolute horror'.

Authors:  Cecelia I Roscigno; Gerald Grant; Teresa A Savage; Gerry Philipsen
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 6.  The validity of using analogue patients in practitioner-patient communication research: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Liesbeth M van Vliet; Elsken van der Wall; Akke Albada; Peter M M Spreeuwenberg; William Verheul; Jozien M Bensing
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-06-15       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Ethical challenges in surgery as narrated by practicing surgeons.

Authors:  Kirsti Torjuul; Ann Nordam; Venke Sørlie
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2005-02-28       Impact factor: 2.652

8.  Overcoming language barriers in healthcare: A protocol for investigating safe and effective communication when patients or clinicians use a second language.

Authors:  Renata F I Meuter; Cindy Gallois; Norman S Segalowitz; Andrew G Ryder; Julia Hocking
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 9.  A systematic review of tests of empathy in medicine.

Authors:  Joanne M Hemmerdinger; Samuel D R Stoddart; Richard J Lilford
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 2.463

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.