Search

Purpose: We undertook a study to observe in detail the primary care interactions and communications of patients with newly diagnosed diabetes over time. In addition, we sought to identify key points in the process where miscommunication might occur., Methods: All health interactions of 32 patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes were recorded and tracked as they moved through the New Zealand health care system for a period of approximately 6 months. Data included video recordings of patient interactions with the health professionals involved in their care (eg, general practitioners, nurses, dietitians). We analyzed data with ethnography and interaction analysis., Results: Challenges to effective communication in diabetes care were identified. Although clinicians showed high levels of technical knowledge and general communication skill, initial consultations were often driven by biomedical explanations out of context from patient experience. There was a perception of time pressure, but considerable time was spent with patients by health professionals repeating information that may not be relevant to patient need. Health professionals had little knowledge of what disciplines other than their own do and how their contributions to patient care may differ., Conclusions: Despite current high skill levels of primary care professionals, opportunities exist to increase the effectiveness of communication and consultation in diabetes care. The various health professionals involved in patient care should agree on the length and focus of each consultation., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: authors report none., (© 2018 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

Background: Barriers to accessing hospice and palliative care have been well studied. An important yet less researched area is why people approaching the end-of-life decline a referral when they are offered services. This review focused on synthesising literature on patients in the last months of life due to a cancer diagnosis who have declined a referral to end-of-life care. Methods: Six academic databases were systematically searched for qualitative literature published between 2007 and 2021. Two researchers independently reviewed and critically appraised the studies. Using meta-ethnographic methods of translation and synthesis, we set out to identify and develop a new overarching model of the reasons patients decline end-of-life care and the factors contributing to this decision. Results: The search yielded 2060 articles, and nine articles were identified that met the review inclusion criteria. The included studies can be reconceptualised with the key concept of 'embodied decisions unfolding over time'. It emphasises the iterative, dynamic, situational, contextual and relational nature of decisions about end-of-life care that are grounded in people's physical experiences. The primary influences on how that decision unfolded for patients were (1) the communication they received about end-of-life care; (2) uncertainty around their prognosis, and (3) the evolving situations in which the patient and family found themselves. Our review identified contextual, person and medical factors that helped to shape the decision-making process. Conclusions: Decisions about when (and for some, whether at all) to accept end-of-life care are made in a complex system with preferences shifting over time, in relation to the embodied experience of life-limiting cancer. Time is central to patients' end-of-life care decision-making, in particular estimating how much time one has left and patients' embodied knowing about when the right time for end-of-life care is. The multiple and intersecting domains of health that inform decision-making, namely physical, mental, social, and existential/spiritual as well as emotions/affect need further exploration. The integration of palliative care across the cancer care trajectory and earlier introduction of end-of-life care highlight the importance of these findings for improving access whilst recognising that accessing end-of-life care will not be desired by all patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores processes of legitimising health knowledge in three different spaces: the clinic, the home and the multidisciplinary meeting. It considers the ways in which categorisation work, health understandings and therapeutic actions are intertwined. The analysis draws on ethnomethodology and actor-network theory to suggest that in the clinic consultation room, a number of interactional elements in talk about side effects and talk about unorthodox interventions attempt to stabilise the categories used by health experts. In contrast, the household is a centre of knowledge production that may subvert, manipulate or align with expert systems. Fixed and stable expert knowledge becomes flexible and hybridised inside the home. In the multidisciplinary team meeting different forms of authority are called upon in hospital-based cancer care meetings, where health professionals mix scientific understandings with other ways of knowing in determining treatment options. From these empirical observations it is argued that therapeutic actions are not subject in any simplistic way to a dominant mode of understanding, but there are many means of understanding that selectively come into play in relation to the specifics of the interaction that is occurring between patients, health professionals and therapeutic spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There is an assumption that there is a similarity between surgeon-patient and primary care consultations. Yet, surgeon communication has had far less analytic attention than its primary care counterparts. Therefore, this assumption of similarity (and the proposition here of dissimilarity) has yet to be evidenced through detailed interactional analysis. Methods Conversation analysis ( CA) is a methodology used to understand both mundane and institutional interactions. Using CA, we have developed an understanding of surgeon-patient interactions in outpatient clinic settings in New Zealand. Rather than attempting to determine what 'bad' communication is, we describe and analyse what occurs routinely in surgeon-patient consultations, particularly how these interactions are built up by both patient and doctor. Results This research shows that while surgeon-patient consultations share some similarities to the overall structure of primary care consultations, there are two unique structures that occur in surgical consultations. These structures follow a logical progression of activities and are influenced by the type of visit (referred versus follow-up). Discussion This article summarizes the first comprehensive description of the overall interactional structure of surgeon-patient consultations. It demonstrates that surgeon-patient consultations are structurally distinct from primary care consultations. This key finding has implications for surgeon-specific research and education, highlighting the need to question current assumptions in communication training and in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diabetes is a major health issue for individuals and for health services. There is a considerable literature on the management of diabetes and also on communication in primary care consultations. However, few studies combine these two topics and specifically in relation to nurse communication. This paper describes the nature of nurse-patient communication in diabetes management. Methods: Thirty-five primary health care consultations involving 18 patients and 10 nurses were video-recorded as part of a larger multi-site study tracking health care interactions between health professionals and patients who were newly diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. Patients and nurses were interviewed separately at the end of the 6-month study period and asked to describe their experience of managing diabetes. The analysis used ethnography and interaction analysis. In addition to analysis of the recorded consultations and interviews, the number of consultations for each patient and total time spent with nurses and other health professionals were quantified and compared. Results: This study showed that initial consultations with nurses often incorporated completion of extensive checklists, physical examination, referral to other health professionals and distribution of written material, and were typically longer than consultations with other health professionals. The consultations were driven more by the nurses' clinical agenda than by what the patient already knew or wanted to know. Interactional analysis showed that protocols and checklists both help and hinder the communication process. This contradictory outcome was also evident at a health systems level: although organisational targets may have been met, the patient did not always feel that their priorities were attended to. Both nurses and patients reported a sense of being overwhelmed arising from the sheer volume of information exchanged along with a mismatch in expectations. Conclusions: Conscientious nursing work was evident but at times misdirected in terms of optimal use of time. The misalignment of patient expectations and clinical protocols highlights a common dilemma in clinical practice and raises questions about the best ways to balance the needs of individuals with the needs of a health system. Video- recording can be a powerful tool for reflection and peer review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]