Sharing knowledge and shaping identities in healthcare interactions

How student healthcare providers in a communication skills course respond to standardized patient resistance

Encountering and responding to patient resistance can be especially challenging for student healthcare providers. Navigating who ultimately holds the authority to know and understand a health concern, make recommendations for a course of action, and accept or resist these recommendations are all part of how epistemic authority is negotiated in medical settings. The purpose of this paper is to systematically examine how student providers enrolled in a communication skills course at an American university responded to standardized patient resistance. The data for this study were 121 video-recorded and transcribed final objective structured clinical examinations from the fall 2019 course. We used discourse analysis informed by principles of conversation analysis to identify several discursive strategies used by the students, including: 1) asking for clarification; 2) expressing uncertainty and offering to gather additional resources; 3) aligning with and offering an account for the resistance; 4) recommending a new course of action; and 5) confronting the resistance. Our findings point to the value of including instruction for both student healthcare providers and standardized patients on how to respond to resistance they encounter in ways that may help improve healthcare outcomes.

What the doctor doesn't know: Discarded patient knowledge of older adults with multimorbidity

OBJECTIVES

Adherence to treatment has proven to require the involvement of patients in treatment and care planning. This process involves incorporating patient knowledge, or knowledge about the patients' everyday life, into the clinical encounter. This article explores the disclosure practices of such knowledge from older adults with multimorbidity.

METHODS

This was an 18-month qualitative study among 14 older adults with multimorbidity living in Denmark. A thematic analysis was applied, focusing on perceptions of patient knowledge and disclosure practices among the participating patients.

RESULTS

Older adults with multimorbidity have various reasons for not disclosing personal knowledge. The results present three different domains of what we termed discarded patient knowledge: (1) knowledge that had no direct biomedical relevance from participants' perspective; (2) knowledge considered too private; and (3) knowledge assumed to position one as inferior.

DISCUSSION

The participants made judgments on what they believed was welcome in the clinical encounter, framing their knowledge within the purview of biomedicine. Participants' disclosure practices showed that personal knowledge is sometimes not recognized as important for health and care by participants themselves. Knowledge that could have influenced practitioners' understanding of the problem and provided different solutions, is argued to be discarded patient knowledge.