BACKGROUND: Effective communication in the preanesthesia clinic is important in patient-centered care. Although patient-physician communication has been studied by recordings in other contexts, there have been no observational studies of the communication patterns of anesthesiologists and patients during the preanesthesia interview. METHODS: Two experienced standardized patients were trained to portray the same clinical situation by using different coping styles (maximizing information or "monitoring" vs. minimizing information or "blunting"). Interviews of standardized patients by anesthesiologists took place in the preanesthesia clinic and recorded with the knowledge of the subjects. Audio recordings were analyzed, and the visit was separated into nine components. Discussion of the risks/informed consent process was examined, looking for discussion of common morbidities. The standardized patients completed a survey on the patient-centeredness of the interview. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects participated in this study. Interviews with the monitor required more time: 17.4 min (confidence interval [CI] 15.2-19.6, n = 24) versus 14.5 min (CI 13.1-16.0, n = 25), P < 0.05. Most interview time was spent in obtaining the history; 2.4 min (CI 1.8-3.1) was spent discussing risks with the monitor, and only 1.6 min (CI 1.2-2.0) was spent with the blunter (P < 0.05). Neither the monitor nor the blunter scored the interview highly for involving the patient in determining the goals of the anesthetic and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Direct recording of interactions with standardized patients is a feasible method of studying the communication skills of anesthesiologists. For this study, the anesthesia providers were able to modify their approach depending on patient type, but the monitor received more information.
BACKGROUND: Effective communication in the preanesthesia clinic is important in patient-centered care. Although patient-physician communication has been studied by recordings in other contexts, there have been no observational studies of the communication patterns of anesthesiologists and patients during the preanesthesia interview. METHODS: Two experienced standardized patients were trained to portray the same clinical situation by using different coping styles (maximizing information or "monitoring" vs. minimizing information or "blunting"). Interviews of standardized patients by anesthesiologists took place in the preanesthesia clinic and recorded with the knowledge of the subjects. Audio recordings were analyzed, and the visit was separated into nine components. Discussion of the risks/informed consent process was examined, looking for discussion of common morbidities. The standardized patients completed a survey on the patient-centeredness of the interview. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects participated in this study. Interviews with the monitor required more time: 17.4 min (confidence interval [CI] 15.2-19.6, n = 24) versus 14.5 min (CI 13.1-16.0, n = 25), P < 0.05. Most interview time was spent in obtaining the history; 2.4 min (CI 1.8-3.1) was spent discussing risks with the monitor, and only 1.6 min (CI 1.2-2.0) was spent with the blunter (P < 0.05). Neither the monitor nor the blunter scored the interview highly for involving the patient in determining the goals of the anesthetic and recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Direct recording of interactions with standardized patients is a feasible method of studying the communication skills of anesthesiologists. For this study, the anesthesia providers were able to modify their approach depending on patient type, but the monitor received more information.
Authors: Amy C Robertson; Leslie C Fowler; Jon Niconchuk; Michael Kreger; Elizabeth Rickerson; Nicholas Sadovnikoff; David L Hepner; Angela M Bader; Matthew D Mcevoy; Richard D Urman Journal: J Educ Perioper Med Date: 2019-01-01
Authors: Michael J Tylee; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Duminda Wijeysundera; Michael C Sklar; Sajid Hussain; Neill K J Adhikari Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-11-02