Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis

•Introducing the precarious topic of care decisions presents several dilemmas.•There is no obvious interactional slot, therefore effort is needed.•Common ground needs to be created, possibly over time.•Framing as relevant in the future but needs to be discussed now creates a paradox.•Physicians’ tra...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Patient education and counseling 2022-07, Vol.105 (7), p.2045-2052
Hauptverfasser: Briedé, Saskia, van Charldorp, Tessa C., Kaasjager, Karin A.H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2052
container_issue 7
container_start_page 2045
container_title Patient education and counseling
container_volume 105
creator Briedé, Saskia
van Charldorp, Tessa C.
Kaasjager, Karin A.H.
description •Introducing the precarious topic of care decisions presents several dilemmas.•There is no obvious interactional slot, therefore effort is needed.•Common ground needs to be created, possibly over time.•Framing as relevant in the future but needs to be discussed now creates a paradox.•Physicians’ training should address these dilemma’s. Explore how often, when and how care decisions are discussed during consultations at an internal medicine outpatient clinic, and what we can learn from these observations. Qualitative analysis of 150 video-taped consultations. Consultations involving a discussion of care decisions were analyzed using conversation analysis. 1) Only 21 of the 150 consultations involved a discussion of care decisions; 2) As there is no destined phase for the introduction of the topic of care decisions, the topic is most often introduced at the end of the phase ‘treatment and course of the disease’; 3) A lot of interactional effort is needed to create common ground and make relevance clear with extensive justification. Hesitation markers, repairs and hypothetical talk show the precariousness of the topic. Three dilemma’s need to be addressed: 1) a slot has to be created to introduce the topic of care decisions; 2) common ground has to be created, possibly over time; 3) the paradox of framing the topic as relevant ‘in the future’ but ‘needs to be discussed now’ needs to be attended to. We recommend that physician training should address the three dilemmas. Future research should focus on how to do so.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.029
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2615108890</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S073839912100776X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2615108890</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4cdb47be4db4302ef1d5f53272924c08034b887522b9c8aaed50053e687db3023</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWh8_wI1k6WbG3GQeGV2V-gTBjS4lZDK3mjLN1CRT8N-b0urS1YHLdw7cj5BzYDkwqK4W-QpNzhmHHCBnvNkjE5C1yEoQxT6ZsFrITDQNHJHjEBaMsaoq4JAciaKpoCr5hLzf2mDGEKz7oEZ7pB0aG-zgAtWRxk-k1kX0Tvd0iZ011iEdxrjS0aKL1PTWWXNNp9QMbo0-pPvgqE78d7DhlBzMdR_wbJcn5O3-7nX2mD2_PDzNps-ZEU0Vs8J0bVG3WKQQjOMcunJeCl7zhheGSSaKVsq65LxtjNQau5KxUmAl665NBXFCLre7Kz98jRiiWqa3sO-1w2EMildQApOyYQmFLWr8EILHuVp5u9T-WwFTG6tqoZJVtbGqAFSymjoXu_mxTRb-Gr8aE3CzBTA9ubboVTDJj0nGPJqousH-M_8D8VCIRQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2615108890</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Briedé, Saskia ; van Charldorp, Tessa C. ; Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Briedé, Saskia ; van Charldorp, Tessa C. ; Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</creatorcontrib><description>•Introducing the precarious topic of care decisions presents several dilemmas.•There is no obvious interactional slot, therefore effort is needed.•Common ground needs to be created, possibly over time.•Framing as relevant in the future but needs to be discussed now creates a paradox.•Physicians’ training should address these dilemma’s. Explore how often, when and how care decisions are discussed during consultations at an internal medicine outpatient clinic, and what we can learn from these observations. Qualitative analysis of 150 video-taped consultations. Consultations involving a discussion of care decisions were analyzed using conversation analysis. 1) Only 21 of the 150 consultations involved a discussion of care decisions; 2) As there is no destined phase for the introduction of the topic of care decisions, the topic is most often introduced at the end of the phase ‘treatment and course of the disease’; 3) A lot of interactional effort is needed to create common ground and make relevance clear with extensive justification. Hesitation markers, repairs and hypothetical talk show the precariousness of the topic. Three dilemma’s need to be addressed: 1) a slot has to be created to introduce the topic of care decisions; 2) common ground has to be created, possibly over time; 3) the paradox of framing the topic as relevant ‘in the future’ but ‘needs to be discussed now’ needs to be attended to. We recommend that physician training should address the three dilemmas. Future research should focus on how to do so.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0738-3991</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5134</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.029</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34961652</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Ambulatory Care Facilities ; Care decisions ; Communication ; Communication training ; Conversation analysis ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Outpatient clinic ; Patient education ; Physician-patient communication ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Physicians ; Referral and Consultation ; Treatment limitations</subject><ispartof>Patient education and counseling, 2022-07, Vol.105 (7), p.2045-2052</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4cdb47be4db4302ef1d5f53272924c08034b887522b9c8aaed50053e687db3023</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4cdb47be4db4302ef1d5f53272924c08034b887522b9c8aaed50053e687db3023</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073839912100776X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34961652$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Briedé, Saskia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Charldorp, Tessa C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</creatorcontrib><title>Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis</title><title>Patient education and counseling</title><addtitle>Patient Educ Couns</addtitle><description>•Introducing the precarious topic of care decisions presents several dilemmas.•There is no obvious interactional slot, therefore effort is needed.•Common ground needs to be created, possibly over time.•Framing as relevant in the future but needs to be discussed now creates a paradox.•Physicians’ training should address these dilemma’s. Explore how often, when and how care decisions are discussed during consultations at an internal medicine outpatient clinic, and what we can learn from these observations. Qualitative analysis of 150 video-taped consultations. Consultations involving a discussion of care decisions were analyzed using conversation analysis. 1) Only 21 of the 150 consultations involved a discussion of care decisions; 2) As there is no destined phase for the introduction of the topic of care decisions, the topic is most often introduced at the end of the phase ‘treatment and course of the disease’; 3) A lot of interactional effort is needed to create common ground and make relevance clear with extensive justification. Hesitation markers, repairs and hypothetical talk show the precariousness of the topic. Three dilemma’s need to be addressed: 1) a slot has to be created to introduce the topic of care decisions; 2) common ground has to be created, possibly over time; 3) the paradox of framing the topic as relevant ‘in the future’ but ‘needs to be discussed now’ needs to be attended to. We recommend that physician training should address the three dilemmas. Future research should focus on how to do so.</description><subject>Ambulatory Care Facilities</subject><subject>Care decisions</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Communication training</subject><subject>Conversation analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Outpatient clinic</subject><subject>Patient education</subject><subject>Physician-patient communication</subject><subject>Physician-Patient Relations</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Referral and Consultation</subject><subject>Treatment limitations</subject><issn>0738-3991</issn><issn>1873-5134</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWh8_wI1k6WbG3GQeGV2V-gTBjS4lZDK3mjLN1CRT8N-b0urS1YHLdw7cj5BzYDkwqK4W-QpNzhmHHCBnvNkjE5C1yEoQxT6ZsFrITDQNHJHjEBaMsaoq4JAciaKpoCr5hLzf2mDGEKz7oEZ7pB0aG-zgAtWRxk-k1kX0Tvd0iZ011iEdxrjS0aKL1PTWWXNNp9QMbo0-pPvgqE78d7DhlBzMdR_wbJcn5O3-7nX2mD2_PDzNps-ZEU0Vs8J0bVG3WKQQjOMcunJeCl7zhheGSSaKVsq65LxtjNQau5KxUmAl665NBXFCLre7Kz98jRiiWqa3sO-1w2EMildQApOyYQmFLWr8EILHuVp5u9T-WwFTG6tqoZJVtbGqAFSymjoXu_mxTRb-Gr8aE3CzBTA9ubboVTDJj0nGPJqousH-M_8D8VCIRQ</recordid><startdate>20220701</startdate><enddate>20220701</enddate><creator>Briedé, Saskia</creator><creator>van Charldorp, Tessa C.</creator><creator>Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220701</creationdate><title>Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis</title><author>Briedé, Saskia ; van Charldorp, Tessa C. ; Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c396t-4cdb47be4db4302ef1d5f53272924c08034b887522b9c8aaed50053e687db3023</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Ambulatory Care Facilities</topic><topic>Care decisions</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Communication training</topic><topic>Conversation analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Outpatient clinic</topic><topic>Patient education</topic><topic>Physician-patient communication</topic><topic>Physician-Patient Relations</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Referral and Consultation</topic><topic>Treatment limitations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Briedé, Saskia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Charldorp, Tessa C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Patient education and counseling</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Briedé, Saskia</au><au>van Charldorp, Tessa C.</au><au>Kaasjager, Karin A.H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis</atitle><jtitle>Patient education and counseling</jtitle><addtitle>Patient Educ Couns</addtitle><date>2022-07-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>105</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2045</spage><epage>2052</epage><pages>2045-2052</pages><issn>0738-3991</issn><eissn>1873-5134</eissn><abstract>•Introducing the precarious topic of care decisions presents several dilemmas.•There is no obvious interactional slot, therefore effort is needed.•Common ground needs to be created, possibly over time.•Framing as relevant in the future but needs to be discussed now creates a paradox.•Physicians’ training should address these dilemma’s. Explore how often, when and how care decisions are discussed during consultations at an internal medicine outpatient clinic, and what we can learn from these observations. Qualitative analysis of 150 video-taped consultations. Consultations involving a discussion of care decisions were analyzed using conversation analysis. 1) Only 21 of the 150 consultations involved a discussion of care decisions; 2) As there is no destined phase for the introduction of the topic of care decisions, the topic is most often introduced at the end of the phase ‘treatment and course of the disease’; 3) A lot of interactional effort is needed to create common ground and make relevance clear with extensive justification. Hesitation markers, repairs and hypothetical talk show the precariousness of the topic. Three dilemma’s need to be addressed: 1) a slot has to be created to introduce the topic of care decisions; 2) common ground has to be created, possibly over time; 3) the paradox of framing the topic as relevant ‘in the future’ but ‘needs to be discussed now’ needs to be attended to. We recommend that physician training should address the three dilemmas. Future research should focus on how to do so.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>34961652</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.029</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0738-3991
ispartof Patient education and counseling, 2022-07, Vol.105 (7), p.2045-2052
issn 0738-3991
1873-5134
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2615108890
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Ambulatory Care Facilities
Care decisions
Communication
Communication training
Conversation analysis
Humans
Internal Medicine
Outpatient clinic
Patient education
Physician-patient communication
Physician-Patient Relations
Physicians
Referral and Consultation
Treatment limitations
title Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T11%3A48%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Discussing%20care%20decisions%20at%20the%20internal%20medicine%20outpatient%20clinic:%20A%20conversation%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Patient%20education%20and%20counseling&rft.au=Bried%C3%A9,%20Saskia&rft.date=2022-07-01&rft.volume=105&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2045&rft.epage=2052&rft.pages=2045-2052&rft.issn=0738-3991&rft.eissn=1873-5134&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.029&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2615108890%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2615108890&rft_id=info:pmid/34961652&rft_els_id=S073839912100776X&rfr_iscdi=true