Stephen G Henry1, Anthony Jerant2, Ana-Maria Iosif3, Mitchell D Feldman4, Camille Cipri5, Richard L Kravitz6. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA; Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA. Electronic address: sghenry@ucdavis.edu. 2. Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA; Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA. 3. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California Davis, Davis, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. 5. Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA; Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with participant consent to record visits; to estimate effects of recording on patient-clinician interactions. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial studying communication about depression; participants were asked for optional consent to audio record study visits. Multiple logistic regression was used to model likelihood of patient and clinician consent. Multivariable regression and propensity score analyses were used to estimate effects of audio recording on 6 dependent variables: discussion of depressive symptoms, preventive health, and depression diagnosis; depression treatment recommendations; visit length; visit difficulty. RESULTS:Of 867 visits involving 135 primary care clinicians, 39% were recorded. For clinicians, only working in academic settings (P=0.003) and having worked longer at their current practice (P=0.02) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. For patients, white race (P=0.002) and diabetes (P=0.03) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. Neither multivariable regression nor propensity score analyses revealed any significant effects of recording on the variables examined. CONCLUSION: Few clinician or patient characteristics were significantly associated with consent. Audio recording had no significant effect on any of the 6 dependent variables examined. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Benefits of recording clinic visits likely outweigh the risks of bias in this setting.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with participant consent to record visits; to estimate effects of recording on patient-clinician interactions. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial studying communication about depression; participants were asked for optional consent to audio record study visits. Multiple logistic regression was used to model likelihood of patient and clinician consent. Multivariable regression and propensity score analyses were used to estimate effects of audio recording on 6 dependent variables: discussion of depressive symptoms, preventive health, and depression diagnosis; depression treatment recommendations; visit length; visit difficulty. RESULTS: Of 867 visits involving 135 primary care clinicians, 39% were recorded. For clinicians, only working in academic settings (P=0.003) and having worked longer at their current practice (P=0.02) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. For patients, white race (P=0.002) and diabetes (P=0.03) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. Neither multivariable regression nor propensity score analyses revealed any significant effects of recording on the variables examined. CONCLUSION: Few clinician or patient characteristics were significantly associated with consent. Audio recording had no significant effect on any of the 6 dependent variables examined. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Benefits of recording clinic visits likely outweigh the risks of bias in this setting.
Authors: Susan Hrisos; Martin P Eccles; Jill J Francis; Heather O Dickinson; Eileen F S Kaner; Fiona Beyer; Marie Johnston Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-07-03 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Thomas A D'Agostino; Abenaa M Brewster; Susan K Peterson; Isabelle Bedrosian; Patricia A Parker Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Stephen G Henry; Anne Elizabeth Clark White; Elizabeth M Magnan; Eve Angeline Hood-Medland; Melissa Gosdin; Richard L Kravitz; Peter Joseph Torres; Jennifer Gerwing Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2020-06-03
Authors: Garrett T Wasp; Kristin E Knutzen; Genevra F Murray; Olivia C Brody-Bizar; Matthew A Liu; Kathryn I Pollak; James A Tulsky; Yael Schenker; Amber E Barnato Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-12-02
Authors: Anthony Jerant; Brent Hanson; Richard L Kravitz; Daniel J Tancredi; Emily Hanes; Sanjeet Grewal; Rimaben Cabrera; Peter Franks Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2016-08-22
Authors: Janet A Curran; Andrea Bishop; Amy Plint; Shannon MacPhee; Roger Zemek; Jill Chorney; Mona Jabbour; Stephen Porter; Scott Sawyer Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 2.655