Communicative conduct in commercial medicine: initial consultations between plastic surgeons and prospective clients

Oncologists' Perceptions of Strategies for Discussing the Cost of Care with Cancer Patients and the Meaning of Those Conversations

To better understand what makes cost-of-care communication between oncologists and cancer patients more or less successful, we conducted in-depth interviews with 32 oncologists (22 male, 10 female) who were board-certified in medical, surgical, or radiation oncology. Through qualitative descriptive analysis by four coders, we found that oncologists used six broad strategies to discuss cost with patients: open discussion, avoidance, reassurance, warning, outsourcing, and educating. We also found that oncologists invoked certain meanings of cost conversations: cost conversations as holistic care, coercion, a matter of timing, risking patient suspicions, advocacy, unwanted distraction, transparency, bad news delivery, problem-solving, pointless, informed decision making, or irrelevant. These meanings appeared to be linked to oncologists enacting certain strategies (e.g., oncologists who invoked cost conversations as holistic care tended to enact open discussion, those who saw cost conversations as risky tended to use avoidance). Theoretically, our results suggest that the invoked meaning of a difficult conversation may be a key explanatory mechanism for differentiating high-quality from low-quality communication in cost conversations. Practically, our findings suggest that oncologists should consider how well the invoked meaning of the cost conversation is serving their own and their patients' goals.

The Basic Science of Patient-Physician Communication: A Critical Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Strong verbal communication skills are essential for physicians. Despite a wealth of medical education research exploring communication skills training, learners struggle to become strong communicators. Integrating basic science into the curriculum provides students with conceptual knowledge that improves learning outcomes and facilitates the development of adaptive expertise, but the conceptual knowledge, or "basic science," of patient-provider communication is currently unknown. This review sought to address that gap and identify conceptual knowledge that would support improved communication skills training for medical trainees.

METHOD

Combining the search methodology of Arksey and O'Malley with a critical analytical lens, the authors conducted a critical scoping review of literature in linguistics, cognitive psychology, and communications to determine: what is known about verbal communication at the level of word choice in physician-patient interactions? Studies were independently screened by 3 researchers during 2 rounds of review. Data extraction focused on theoretical contributions associated with language use and variation. Analysis linked patterns of language use to broader theoretical constructs across disciplines.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 15,851 unique studies, and 271 studies were included in the review. The dominant conceptual groupings reflected in the results were: (1) clear and explicit language, (2) patient participation and activation, (3) negotiating epistemic knowledge, (4) affiliative language and emotional bonds, (5) role and identity, and (6) managing transactional and relational goals.

CONCLUSIONS

This in-depth exploration supports and contextualizes theory-driven research of physician-patient communication. The findings may be used to support future communications research in this field and educational innovations based on a solid theoretical foundation.

Primary Care Physicians' Strategic Pursuit of Multiple Goals in Cost-of-Care Conversations with Patients

Despite the importance of cost-of-care conversations between physicians and patients, such discussions are not well understood. We used multiple goals theory to examine the specific goals that are salient in these discussions and how physicians pursue these goals. We used qualitative descriptive coding to analyze the verbatim transcripts from in-depth interviews with 36 primary care physicians. Our analysis identified a number of goals that are commonly salient in cost conversations, including task goals (reducing the cost of care, making treatment decisions, and promoting patient adherence), identity goals (reinforcing their professional identity as a "good doctor," acting as a steward of medical resources, being an advocate for patients, and preventing patient embarrassment), and relational goals (strengthening the physician-patient relationship and mitigating damage to the physician-patient relationship). In addition, participants articulated a number of ways in which these goals compete with each other, making cost conversations challenging. We found that physicians use a common repertoire of rhetorical strategies to manage these goals, including directly addressing cost, avoiding discussion of cost, and falsely reassuring patients about cost concerns. Our analysis revealed that the meaning of the cost conversation explains the connection between physicians' goals and strategies. Specifically, we found that physicians invoke polysemic meanings of cost conversations to achieve their multiple goals using seemingly contradictory strategies. The results of our analysis have implications for building theory and improving practice.

Psychosocial predictors, assessment, and outcomes of cosmetic procedures: a systematic rapid evidence assessment

BACKGROUND

Recent breast implant complications led to a UK government policy review of the evidence concerning cosmetic interventions. We synthesised cosmetic intervention research evidence covering psychosocial factors associated with requesting procedures and psychological outcomes, effects of procedures on psychological outcomes, preintervention assessments for identifying those at risk, alternative therapy effectiveness, and issues in achieving informed consent.

METHODS

Undertaking a systematic rapid evidence assessment, six databases and three journals were searched. Included studies were systematic reviews or primary studies of participants requesting cosmetic procedures; published 2002-2012; containing either psychological or psychosocial measures, a psychological outcome, or evaluation of informed consent. Reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed quality, undertaking narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Methodological quality of the included 13 systematic reviews and 179 primary studies was low, with wide variation in psychosocial measures. Findings suggest several psychosocial factors (e.g., intimate partner violence) may be associated with requesting cosmetic surgery. Multiple factors (e.g., unrealistic expectations) may predict poor psychological outcomes. Current psychological screening tools focus predominantly on body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) symptoms. Psychological and pharmacological interventions are effective alternative BDD treatments. Patients and doctors bring different needs to informed consent discussions, inconsistently matched to those required by professional ethics, litigation risk, and facilitating profit.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematically reviewing this literature for UK policy has highlighted that some groups may be at risk of poor post-cosmetic procedure outcomes. Practitioners and patients must explore reasons for seeking cosmetic procedures and discuss all potential results and alternative solutions. Future research should employ more robust methodologies to identify effects in those at risk, led by consensus on a core set of psychological outcomes.

Patients' perceptions of cosmetic surgery at a time of globalization, medical consumerism, and mass media culture: a French experience

BACKGROUND

The global popularity of cosmetic surgery, combined with mass media attention on medical consumerism, has resulted in misinformation that may have negatively affected the "collective image" of aesthetic practitioners.

OBJECTIVES

The authors assess patients' perceptions of cosmetic surgery and analyze their decision-making processes.

METHODS

During a 2-year period, 250 consecutive patients presenting to either of 2 public hospitals for cosmetic surgery treatment were asked to complete a 7-item questionnaire evaluating their knowledge of opinions about, and referring practices for, aesthetic procedures. Patients undergoing oncologic, postbariatric, or reconstructive procedures were not included in the study.

RESULTS

After exclusion of 71 cases for refusal or incompletion, 179 questionnaires were retained and analyzed (from 162 women and 17 men). Overall, repair (70.4%), comfort (45.3%), and health (40.8%) were the words most frequently associated with cosmetic surgery. Quality of preoperative information (69.3%), patient-physician relationship (65.4%), and results seen in relatives/friends (46.3%) were the most important criteria for selecting a cosmetic surgeon. Moreover, 82.7% of patients knew the difference between cosmetic surgery and cosmetic medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Although potential patients appear to be more educated about cosmetic surgery than they were several years ago, misinformation still persists. As physicians, we must be responsible for disseminating accurate education and strengthening our collaboration with general practitioners to improve not only our results but also the accuracy of information in the mass media.

Passing the baton: a grounded practical theory of handoff communication between multidisciplinary providers in two Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient settings

BACKGROUND

Handoffs are communication processes that enact the transfer of responsibility between providers across clinical settings. Prior research on handoff communication has focused on inpatient settings between provider teams and has emphasized patient safety. This study examines handoff communication within multidisciplinary provider teams in two outpatient settings.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an exploratory study that describes handoff communication among multidisciplinary providers, to develop a theory-driven descriptive framework for outpatient handoffs, and to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of different handoff types.

DESIGN & SETTING

Qualitative, in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 31 primary care, mental health, and social work providers in two Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center outpatient clinics.

APPROACH

Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Grounded Practical Theory to develop a theoretical model of and a descriptive framework for handoff communication among multidisciplinary providers.

RESULTS

Multidisciplinary providers reported that handoff decisions across settings were made spontaneously and without clear guidelines. Two situated values, clinic efficiency and patient-centeredness, shaped multidisciplinary providers' handoff decisions. Providers reported three handoff techniques along a continuum: the electronic handoff, which was the most clinically efficient; the provider-to-provider handoff, which balanced clinic efficiency and patient-centeredness; and the collaborative handoff, which was the most patient-centered. Providers described handoff choice as a practical response to manage constituent features of clinic efficiency (time, space, medium of communication) and patient-centeredness (information continuity, management continuity, relational continuity, and social interaction). We present a theoretical and descriptive framework to help providers evaluate differential handoff use, reflect on situated values guiding clinic communication, and guide future research.

CONCLUSIONS

Handoff communication reflected multidisciplinary providers' efforts to balance clinic efficiency with patient-centeredness within the constraints of day-to-day clinical practice. Evaluating the strengths and weaknesses among alternative handoff options may enhance multidisciplinary provider handoff decision-making and may contribute to increased coordination and continuity of care across outpatient settings.

Women and cosmetic breast surgery: weighing the medical, social, and lifestyle risks

In this article we provide a comparative analysis of qualitative, semistructured interviews with 24 women who had undergone different forms of cosmetic breast surgery (CBS). We argue that women must negotiate three types of risk: potential medical risks, lifestyle risks connected with choosing "frivolous" self-enhancements, and countervailing social risks affiliated with pressures to maximize one's feminine beauty. In addition, we highlight the challenges faced in negotiating these risks by examining the limits to traditional forms of medical informed consent provided to the women, who received little information on the medical risks associated with CBS, or who were given uncertain and contradictory risk information. Even respondents who felt that they were well informed expressed difficulties in making "wise" choices because the risks were distant or unlikely, and hence easily minimized. Given this, it is fairly understandable that the known social risks of "failed" beauty faced by the women often outweighed the ambiguous or understated risks outlined by medicine. We argue that traditional notions of informed consent and risk awareness might not be adequate for women choosing CBS.

Clinician-patient communication in a glaucoma clinic in India

We compiled data from nonparticipant observations of clinician-patient communication in clinical interactions in a tertiary care eye hospital in India. Applying elements of the French philosopher Michel Foucault's concept of power and knowledge, we deconstructed the structuring and moderating influences on the expert/nonexpert dyad. We found that clinicians enforce their "disciplining power" through varying degrees of communicativeness to bring about compliance in the patient. Clinicians appear to classify the patient as "participant" or "deviant" based on the patient's "internalization" of instructions, and then communicate in predictable ways with the patient. Patients can also wield power, communicating it by understanding and following or not understanding and not clarifying/verifying instructions in the clinic, and thereafter failing to comply with the clinician's advice. We suggest that clinicians need to hone their communication skills both to optimally utilize interactions in the clinic and to encourage patient compliance, thereby making possible better treatment outcomes.