Cargando…

Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts

BACKGROUND: Shared decision–making requires doctors to be competent in exchanging views with patients to identify the appropriate course of action. In this paper we focus on the potential of a course in argumentation as a promising way to empower doctors in presenting their viewpoints and addressing...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zanini, Claudia, Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo, Atzeni, Fabiola, Di Franco, Manuela, Rubinelli, Sara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4469318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25986603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0374-6
_version_ 1782376611263283200
author Zanini, Claudia
Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo
Atzeni, Fabiola
Di Franco, Manuela
Rubinelli, Sara
author_facet Zanini, Claudia
Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo
Atzeni, Fabiola
Di Franco, Manuela
Rubinelli, Sara
author_sort Zanini, Claudia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Shared decision–making requires doctors to be competent in exchanging views with patients to identify the appropriate course of action. In this paper we focus on the potential of a course in argumentation as a promising way to empower doctors in presenting their viewpoints and addressing those of patients. Argumentation is the communication process in which the speaker, through the use of reasons, aims to convince the interlocutor of the acceptability of a viewpoint. The value of argumentation skills for doctors has been addressed in the literature. Yet, there is no research on what a course on argumentation might look like. In this paper, we present the content and format of a training session in argumentation for doctors and discuss some insights gained from a pilot study that examined doctors’ perceived strengths and limitations vis-à-vis this training. METHODS: The training session (eight hours) combined different aspects from prominent theories of argumentation and was designed to strengthen doctors’ argumentative discussion skills. A convenient, self-selected sample of 17 doctors who were experts in the field of chronic pain participated in the training and evaluated it via a feedback form and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The participants found that the training session gave a structure to types of communication they use to interact with their patients, and taught them techniques that can increase their effectiveness. Moreover, it provided tools to help address some of the challenges of modern doctor–patient interactions, including dealing with patients’ unrealistic expectations and medically inaccurate beliefs, and reaching agreement when there are differences of opinion. CONCLUSIONS: This study enriches the research in the field of medical education. In line with the findings of studies that explore the value of argumentation in different fields, argumentative discussion skills can be applied by doctors to express their views and to account for the views of patients without patronizing the interaction. In this paper, we provide a basis to reflect on the value of argumentation in enhancing patients’ right to autonomy and self-determination in interactions with their doctors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4469318
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44693182015-06-17 Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts Zanini, Claudia Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo Atzeni, Fabiola Di Franco, Manuela Rubinelli, Sara BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Shared decision–making requires doctors to be competent in exchanging views with patients to identify the appropriate course of action. In this paper we focus on the potential of a course in argumentation as a promising way to empower doctors in presenting their viewpoints and addressing those of patients. Argumentation is the communication process in which the speaker, through the use of reasons, aims to convince the interlocutor of the acceptability of a viewpoint. The value of argumentation skills for doctors has been addressed in the literature. Yet, there is no research on what a course on argumentation might look like. In this paper, we present the content and format of a training session in argumentation for doctors and discuss some insights gained from a pilot study that examined doctors’ perceived strengths and limitations vis-à-vis this training. METHODS: The training session (eight hours) combined different aspects from prominent theories of argumentation and was designed to strengthen doctors’ argumentative discussion skills. A convenient, self-selected sample of 17 doctors who were experts in the field of chronic pain participated in the training and evaluated it via a feedback form and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: The participants found that the training session gave a structure to types of communication they use to interact with their patients, and taught them techniques that can increase their effectiveness. Moreover, it provided tools to help address some of the challenges of modern doctor–patient interactions, including dealing with patients’ unrealistic expectations and medically inaccurate beliefs, and reaching agreement when there are differences of opinion. CONCLUSIONS: This study enriches the research in the field of medical education. In line with the findings of studies that explore the value of argumentation in different fields, argumentative discussion skills can be applied by doctors to express their views and to account for the views of patients without patronizing the interaction. In this paper, we provide a basis to reflect on the value of argumentation in enhancing patients’ right to autonomy and self-determination in interactions with their doctors. BioMed Central 2015-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4469318/ /pubmed/25986603 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0374-6 Text en © Zanini et al. 2015 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zanini, Claudia
Sarzi-Puttini, Piercarlo
Atzeni, Fabiola
Di Franco, Manuela
Rubinelli, Sara
Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title_full Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title_fullStr Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title_full_unstemmed Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title_short Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
title_sort building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4469318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25986603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0374-6
work_keys_str_mv AT zaniniclaudia buildingbridgesbetweendoctorsandpatientsthedesignandpilotevaluationofatrainingsessioninargumentationforchronicpainexperts
AT sarziputtinipiercarlo buildingbridgesbetweendoctorsandpatientsthedesignandpilotevaluationofatrainingsessioninargumentationforchronicpainexperts
AT atzenifabiola buildingbridgesbetweendoctorsandpatientsthedesignandpilotevaluationofatrainingsessioninargumentationforchronicpainexperts
AT difrancomanuela buildingbridgesbetweendoctorsandpatientsthedesignandpilotevaluationofatrainingsessioninargumentationforchronicpainexperts
AT rubinellisara buildingbridgesbetweendoctorsandpatientsthedesignandpilotevaluationofatrainingsessioninargumentationforchronicpainexperts