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”;...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |