Hedging, knowledge and interaction: Doctors' and clients' talk about medical information and client experiences in genetic counseling

Vagueness in Goals-of-Care Conferences for Critically Ill Patients: Types of Hedge Language Used by Physicians

OBJECTIVES

Hedge language is a category of language that refers to words or phrases that make statements "fuzzier." We sought to understand how physicians use hedge language during goals-of-care conferences in the ICU.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of transcripts of audio-recorded goals-of-care conferences in the ICU.

SETTING

Thirteen ICUs at six academic and community medical centers in the United States.

PATIENTS

Conferences were between clinicians and surrogates of incapacitated, critically ill adults.

INTERVENTIONS

Four investigators performed a qualitative content analysis of transcripts using deductive followed by inductive methods to identify types of hedge language used by physicians, then coded all instances of hedge language across 40 transcripts to characterize general patterns in usage.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 types of hedge language: numeric probabilistic statement ("there's an 80% chance"), qualitative probabilistic statement ("there's a good chance"), nonprobabilistic uncertainty statement ("hard to say for her"), plausibility shield ("we expect"), emotion-based statement ("we're concerned"), attribution shield ("according to Dr. X"), adaptor ("sort of"), metaphor ("the chips are stacking up against her"), time reference ("too soon to tell"), and contingency statement ("if we are lucky"). For most types of hedge language, we identified distinct subtypes. Physicians used hedge language frequently in every transcript (median: 74 hedges per transcript) to address diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. We observed large variation in how frequently each type and subtype of hedge language was used.

CONCLUSIONS

Hedge language is ubiquitous in physician-surrogate communication during goals-of-care conferences in the ICU and can be used to introduce vagueness to statements in ways beyond expressing uncertainty. It is not known how hedge language impacts decision-making or clinician-surrogate interactions. This study prioritizes specific types of hedge language for future research based on their frequency and novelty.

Delivery of audiological diagnoses for infants: a linguistic analysis of clinical communication

OBJECTIVE

To describe and analyse the linguistic structure of audiological diagnoses for infants, to determine ways to optimise the delivery of diagnostic information to parents during this typically emotive time.

DESIGN

This study analysed the linguistic structure of audio-recorded infant diagnostic appointments.

STUDY SAMPLE

Nine appointments conducted by four experienced paediatric audiologists were analysed.

RESULTS

Diagnoses of normal hearing were delivered explicitly and in a straightforward manner. Positive aspects of this outcome were highlighted, and audiologists used the pronoun "we," conveying a feeling of teamwork. In contrast, when a hearing loss was diagnosed, the diagnosis included disfluencies and the use of hedging, although positive aspects were also emphasised. In these cases, audiologists used the pronoun "I," thereby taking ownership of the results. Differences in the topics raised by audiologists and parents highlighted a mis-match between the information provided and the information requested. Topics addressed by audiologists were primarily medical and procedural, whereas parents were concerned with causes, treatments and experiential information.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the above linguistic strategies may serve to minimise the significance and impact of the diagnosis. Whilst the data are unable to be generalised to other contexts, the study has generated in-depth and nuanced information about diagnosis delivery.

Communication in high risk ante-natal consultations: a direct observational study of interactions between patients and obstetricians

Background

Effective communication is crucial to any doctor-patient consultation, not least in pregnancy where the outcome affects more than one person. While higher levels of patient participation and shared decision making are recognised as desirable, there is little agreement on how best to achieve this. Most previous research in this area is based on reported data such as interviews or surveys and there is a need for more fine-grained analysis of authentic interaction. This study aimed to identify the discourse characteristics and patterns that exemplify effective communication practices in a high-risk ante-natal clinic.

Methods

We video-recorded 20 consultations in a high-risk ante-natal clinic in a large New Zealand city with patients attending for the first time. Post-consultation interviews were conducted with the 20 patients and 13 obstetricians involved. Discourse analysis of the transcripts and videos of the consultations was conducted, in conjunction with thematic analysis of interview transcripts.

Results

Most patients reported high quality communication and high levels of satisfaction; the detailed consultation analysis revealed a range of features likely to have contributed. On the clinician side, these included clear explanations, acknowledgement of the patient’s experience, consideration of patient wishes, and realistic and honest answers to patient questions. On the patient side, these included a high level of engagement with technical aspects of events and procedures, and appropriate questioning of obstetricians.

Conclusions

This study has demonstrated the utility of combining direct observation of consultations with data from patient experience interviews to identify specific features of effective communication in routine obstetric ante-natal care. The findings are relevant to improvements needed in obstetric communication identified in the literature, especially in relation to handling psychosocial issues and conveying empathy, and may be useful to inform communication training for obstetricians. The presence of the unborn child may provide an added incentive for parents to develop their own health literacy and to be an active participant in the consultation on behalf of their child. The findings of this study can lay the groundwork for further, more detailed analysis of communication in ante-natal consultations.

How Primary Care Providers Talk to Patients about Genome Sequencing Results: Risk, Rationale, and Recommendation

BACKGROUND

Genomics will play an increasingly prominent role in clinical medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To describe how primary care physicians (PCPs) discuss and make clinical recommendations about genome sequencing results.

DESIGN

Qualitative analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

PCPs and their generally healthy patients undergoing genome sequencing.

APPROACH

Patients received clinical genome reports that included four categories of results: monogenic disease risk variants (if present), carrier status, five pharmacogenetics results, and polygenic risk estimates for eight cardiometabolic traits. Patients' office visits with their PCPs were audio-recorded, and summative content analysis was used to describe how PCPs discussed genomic results.

KEY RESULTS

For each genomic result discussed in 48 PCP-patient visits, we identified a "take-home" message (recommendation), categorized as continuing current management, further treatment, further evaluation, behavior change, remembering for future care, or sharing with family members. We analyzed how PCPs came to each recommendation by identifying 1) how they described the risk or importance of the given result and 2) the rationale they gave for translating that risk into a specific recommendation. Quantitative analysis showed that continuing current management was the most commonly coded recommendation across results overall (492/749, 66%) and for each individual result type except monogenic disease risk results. Pharmacogenetics was the most common result type to prompt a recommendation to remember for future care (94/119, 79%); carrier status was the most common type prompting a recommendation to share with family members (45/54, 83%); and polygenic results were the most common type prompting a behavior change recommendation (55/58, 95%). One-fifth of recommendation codes associated with monogenic results were for further evaluation (6/24, 25%). Rationales for these recommendations included patient context, family context, and scientific/clinical limitations of sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs distinguish substantive differences among categories of genome sequencing results and use clinical judgment to justify continuing current management in generally healthy patients with genomic results.

Communicating Uncertain News in Cancer Consultations

In cancer communication, most of the literature is in the realm of delivering bad news while much less attention has been given to the communication of uncertain news around the diagnosis and the possible outcomes of the illness. Drawing on video-recorded cancer consultations collected in two Italian hospitals, this article analyzes three communication practices used by oncologists to interactionally manage the uncertainty during the visit: alternating between uncertain bad news and certain good news, anticipating scenarios, and guessing test results. Both diagnostic and personal uncertainties are not hidden to the patient, yet they are reduced through these practices. Such communication practices are present in 32 % of the visits in the data set, indicating that the interactional management of uncertainty is a relevant phenomenon in oncological encounters. Further studies are needed to improve both its understanding and its teaching.

Analyzing communication in genetic consultations--a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review studies that have analyzed communication within medical consultations involving genetic specialists and report on their findings and design.

METHODS

Drawing from PRISMA and appropriate guidelines for reviewing qualitative research, a systematic search of seven databases was conducted, followed by selection of studies for inclusion based on a set of criteria. Three authors conducted data extraction and narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were identified and were heterogeneous in setting, design, and methods, with many including limited descriptions of health professionals involved. Despite this variability, studies generally pursued the following three main objectives: searching for structural patterns within consultations, investigating communication and genetic counseling concepts, and linking process with input- and outcome-measures. Structural patterns identified included clinician dialog dominating consultations, and talk being mostly biomedical. Counseling and communication concepts investigated were: risk communication, the negotiation of power and knowledge, and adherence to genetic counseling ideals. Attempts to link consultation data to input- or outcome-measures were often unsuccessful.

CONCLUSION

More interdisciplinary research, grounded in appropriate theoretical frameworks, is needed to explore inherent complexities in this setting.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings from this review can be used to guide the design of future research into the process of genetic consultations.