Cargando…

“What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations

BACKGROUND: Proven benefits of Shared Decision Making (SDM) include improved patient knowledge, involvement and confidence in making decisions. Although widely advocated in policy, SDM is still not widely implemented in practice. A common patient‐reported barrier is feeling that “doctor knows best”;...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sherlock, Rebecca, Wood, Fiona, Joseph‐Williams, Natalie, Williams, Denitza, Hyam, Joanna, Sweetland, Helen, McGarrigle, Helen, Edwards, Adrian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6543150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30916446
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12881
_version_ 1783423048561459200
author Sherlock, Rebecca
Wood, Fiona
Joseph‐Williams, Natalie
Williams, Denitza
Hyam, Joanna
Sweetland, Helen
McGarrigle, Helen
Edwards, Adrian
author_facet Sherlock, Rebecca
Wood, Fiona
Joseph‐Williams, Natalie
Williams, Denitza
Hyam, Joanna
Sweetland, Helen
McGarrigle, Helen
Edwards, Adrian
author_sort Sherlock, Rebecca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Proven benefits of Shared Decision Making (SDM) include improved patient knowledge, involvement and confidence in making decisions. Although widely advocated in policy, SDM is still not widely implemented in practice. A common patient‐reported barrier is feeling that “doctor knows best”; thus, patients often defer decisions to the clinician. OBJECTIVE: To examine the nature of the discourse when patients ask clinicians for a treatment recommendation during consultations when treatment decisions are being shared and to examine clinicians’ strategies used in response. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Theme‐orientated discourse analysis was performed on eight audio‐recordings of breast cancer diagnostic consultations in which patients or their partners attempted to defer treatment decisions to the clinician. Clinicians were trained in SDM. RESULTS: Tension was evident in a number of consultations when treatment recommendations were requested. Clinicians responded to recommendation requests by explaining why the decision was being shared (personal nature of the decision, individual preferences and equivalent survival outcomes of treatment options). There was only one instance where a clinician gave a treatment recommendation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Strategies for clinicians to facilitate SDM when patients seem to defer decisional responsibility include being clear about why the decision is being shared, acknowledging that this is difficult and making patients feel supported. When patients seek guidance, clinicians can provide a recommendation if grounded in an understanding of the patient's values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6543150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65431502019-06-04 “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations Sherlock, Rebecca Wood, Fiona Joseph‐Williams, Natalie Williams, Denitza Hyam, Joanna Sweetland, Helen McGarrigle, Helen Edwards, Adrian Health Expect Original Research Papers BACKGROUND: Proven benefits of Shared Decision Making (SDM) include improved patient knowledge, involvement and confidence in making decisions. Although widely advocated in policy, SDM is still not widely implemented in practice. A common patient‐reported barrier is feeling that “doctor knows best”; thus, patients often defer decisions to the clinician. OBJECTIVE: To examine the nature of the discourse when patients ask clinicians for a treatment recommendation during consultations when treatment decisions are being shared and to examine clinicians’ strategies used in response. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Theme‐orientated discourse analysis was performed on eight audio‐recordings of breast cancer diagnostic consultations in which patients or their partners attempted to defer treatment decisions to the clinician. Clinicians were trained in SDM. RESULTS: Tension was evident in a number of consultations when treatment recommendations were requested. Clinicians responded to recommendation requests by explaining why the decision was being shared (personal nature of the decision, individual preferences and equivalent survival outcomes of treatment options). There was only one instance where a clinician gave a treatment recommendation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Strategies for clinicians to facilitate SDM when patients seem to defer decisional responsibility include being clear about why the decision is being shared, acknowledging that this is difficult and making patients feel supported. When patients seek guidance, clinicians can provide a recommendation if grounded in an understanding of the patient's values. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-03-27 2019-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6543150/ /pubmed/30916446 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12881 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Papers
Sherlock, Rebecca
Wood, Fiona
Joseph‐Williams, Natalie
Williams, Denitza
Hyam, Joanna
Sweetland, Helen
McGarrigle, Helen
Edwards, Adrian
“What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title_full “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title_fullStr “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title_full_unstemmed “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title_short “What would you recommend doctor?”—Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
title_sort “what would you recommend doctor?”—discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations
topic Original Research Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6543150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30916446
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12881
work_keys_str_mv AT sherlockrebecca whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT woodfiona whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT josephwilliamsnatalie whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT williamsdenitza whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT hyamjoanna whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT sweetlandhelen whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT mcgarriglehelen whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations
AT edwardsadrian whatwouldyourecommenddoctordiscourseanalysisofamomentofdissonancewhensharingdecisionsinclinicalconsultations