Richard L Street1, Howard S Gordon. 1. Department of Communication, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4234, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although patient participation is an important feature of patient-centered health care, few studies have examined how the clinical context affects patient involvement in medical encounters. This investigation examined the way patients communicate with physicians in two diverse post-diagnostic settings, post-angiogram consultations and initial lung cancer visits. METHODS: From transcripts and audiorecordings of post-angiogram consultations (n=88) and initial lung cancer visits (n=62) within a VA hospital in the United States, three measures of patient participation were coded--number of active participation behaviors (questions, acts of assertiveness, and expressions of concern), proportion of patients' utterances in the form of active participation, and conversational involvement (ratio of patient utterances to physician plus patient utterances). Mixed linear regression procedures assessed the independent effects of the clinical setting, physicians' facilitative communication (partnership-building and supportive talk), and patients' age, education, and ethnicity on patient participation. RESULTS: Not only was their less talk in the post-angiogram consultations compared with the lung cancer visits, heart patients also were less conversationally involved (accounted for 25% of the talk) than were lung cancer patients (45% of the talk) and their doctors used proportionally less facilitative talk than did the lung cancer physicians. In both settings, patients were more conversationally engaged when proportionally more of the physicians' talk was facilitative. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical context has a profound effect on patient participation. However, within individual settings, physicians can increase patient involvement by using partnering and supportive communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians and administrators should assess clinical practices that restrict patient involvement in ways that could affect quality of decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: Although patient participation is an important feature of patient-centered health care, few studies have examined how the clinical context affects patient involvement in medical encounters. This investigation examined the way patients communicate with physicians in two diverse post-diagnostic settings, post-angiogram consultations and initial lung cancer visits. METHODS: From transcripts and audiorecordings of post-angiogram consultations (n=88) and initial lung cancer visits (n=62) within a VA hospital in the United States, three measures of patient participation were coded--number of active participation behaviors (questions, acts of assertiveness, and expressions of concern), proportion of patients' utterances in the form of active participation, and conversational involvement (ratio of patient utterances to physician plus patient utterances). Mixed linear regression procedures assessed the independent effects of the clinical setting, physicians' facilitative communication (partnership-building and supportive talk), and patients' age, education, and ethnicity on patient participation. RESULTS: Not only was their less talk in the post-angiogram consultations compared with the lung cancer visits, heartpatients also were less conversationally involved (accounted for 25% of the talk) than were lung cancerpatients (45% of the talk) and their doctors used proportionally less facilitative talk than did the lung cancer physicians. In both settings, patients were more conversationally engaged when proportionally more of the physicians' talk was facilitative. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical context has a profound effect on patient participation. However, within individual settings, physicians can increase patient involvement by using partnering and supportive communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians and administrators should assess clinical practices that restrict patient involvement in ways that could affect quality of decision-making.
Authors: Yolanda M Hyde; Barbara Germino; Merle Mishel; Richard L Street; Lenora Campbell; Dale Brashers; Thomas P Mccoy Journal: J Best Pract Health Prof Divers Date: 2013
Authors: Roberta E Goldman; Amy Sullivan; Anthony L Back; Stewart C Alexander; Robin K Matsuyama; Stephanie J Lee Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2009-01-09
Authors: Somnath Saha; Michele Freeman; Joahd Toure; Kimberly M Tippens; Christine Weeks; Said Ibrahim Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-02-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: E du Pon; A T Wildeboer; A A van Dooren; H J G Bilo; N Kleefstra; S van Dulmen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Jan Ho; Annette McWilliams; Jon Emery; Christobel Saunders; Christopher Reid; Suzanne Robinson; Fraser Brims Journal: BMJ Open Respir Res Date: 2017-06-12