Communication guidelines as a learning tool: an exploration of user preferences in general practice

OBJECTIVE

To explore characteristics of written communication guidelines that enhance the success of training aimed at the application of the recommendations in the guidelines.

METHODS

Seven mixed focus groups were held consisting of communication skill teachers and communication skill learners and three groups with only learners. Analysis was done in line with principles of grounded theory.

RESULTS

Five key attributes of guidelines for communication skill training were identified: complexity, level of detail, format and organization, type of information, and trustworthiness/validity. The desired use of these attributes is related to specific educational purposes and learners' expertise. The low complexity of current communication guidelines is appreciated, but seems ad odds with the wish for more valid communication guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Which guideline characteristics are preferred by users depends on the expertise of the learners and the educational purpose of the guideline.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Communication guidelines can be improved by modifying the key attributes in line with specific educational functions and learner expertise. For example: the communication guidelines used in GP training in the Netherlands, seem to offer an oversimplified model of doctor patient communication. This model may be suited for undergraduate learning, but does not meet the validity demands of physicians in training.

Characteristics of communication guidelines that facilitate or impede guideline use: a focus group study

Background

The quality of doctor-patient communication has a major impact on the quality of medical care. Communication guidelines define best practices for doctor patient communication and are therefore an important tool for improving communication. However, adherence to communication guidelines remains low, despite doctors participating in intensive communication skill training. Implementation research shows that adherence is higher for guidelines in general that are user centred and feasible, which implies that they are consistent with users' opinions, tap into users' existing skills and fit into existing routines. Developers of communication guidelines seem to have been somewhat negligent with regard to user preferences and guideline feasibility. In order to promote the development of user centred and practicable communication guidelines, we elicited user preferences and identified which guideline characteristics facilitate or impede guideline use.

Methods

Seven focus group interviews were conducted with experienced GPs, communication trainers (GPs and behavioural scientists) and communication learners (GP trainees and medical students) and three focus group interviews with groups of GP trainees only. All interviews were transcribed and analysed qualitatively.

Results

The participants identified more impeding guideline characteristics than facilitating ones. The most important impeding characteristic was that guidelines do not easily fit into GPs' day-to-day practice. This is due to rigidity and inefficiency of communication guidelines and erroneous assumptions underpinning guideline development. The most important facilitating characteristic was guideline structure. Guidelines that were structured in distinct phases helped users to remain in control of consultations, which was especially useful in complicated consultations.

Conclusion

Although communication guidelines are generally considered useful, especially for structuring consultations, their usefulness is impaired by lack of flexibility and applicability to practice routines. User centred and feasible guidelines should combine the advantages of helping doctors to structure consultations with flexibility to tailor communication strategies to specific contexts and situations.

Assessing communication skills of clinical call handlers working at an out-of-hours centre: development of the RICE rating scale

BACKGROUND

Out-of-hours centres provide telephone support to patients with medical problems. In most of these centres specially-trained nurses handle incoming telephone calls. They assess patients' needs, the degree of urgency, and determine the level of care required. Assessment of the medical problem and the quality of 'care-by-phone' depend on the medical and communication skills of the call handlers.

AIM

To develop a valid, reliable, and practical rating scale to evaluate the communication skills of call handlers working at an out-of-hours centre and to improve quality of communication.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Qualitative study with focus groups followed by validation of the rating scale and measurement of reliability (internal consistency).

SETTING

Out-of-hours centres in the Netherlands.

METHOD

A focus group developed the rating scale. Experts with experience in training and evaluating communication skills of medical students and GPs commented on the scale to ensure content validity. The reliability of the rating scale was tested in a pilot in which ten specially-trained assessors scored six telephone calls each.

RESULTS

The scale, known as the RICE rating scale, has 17 items divided over four different phases of the telephone consultation: Reason for calling; Information gathering; Conclusion; and Evaluation (RICE). Content validity of the scale was assessed by two experts. Reliability of the scale tested in the pilot was 0.73 (Cronbach's alpha).

CONCLUSION

Establishing a rating scale to assess the communication skills of call handlers which meets common scientific demands, such as content validity and reliability, proved successful. This instrument can be used to give feedback to call handlers.

Setting a standard for performance assessment of doctor-patient communication in general practice

CONTEXT

Continuing professional development (CPD) of general practitioners.

OBJECTIVE

Criterion-referenced standards for assessing performance in the real practice of general practitioners (GPs) should be available to identify learning needs or poor performers for CPD. The applicability of common standard setting procedures in authentic assessment has not been investigated.

METHODS

To set a standard for assessment of GP-patient communication with video observation of daily practice, we investigated 2 well known examples of 2 different standard setting approaches. An Angoff procedure was applied to 8 written cases. A borderline regression method was applied to videotaped consultations of 88 GPs. The procedures and outcomes were evaluated by the applicability of the procedure, the reliability of the standards and the credibility as perceived by the stakeholders, namely, the GPs.

RESULTS

Both methods are applicable and reliable; the obtained standards are credible according to the GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Both modified methods can be used to set a standard for assessment in daily practice. The context in which the standard will be used - i.e. the specific purpose of the standard, the moment the standard must be available or if specific feedback must be given - is important because methods differ in practical aspects.

Quality assessment in general practice trainers

INTRODUCTION

General practice trainers hold a key position in general practice training, especially through their provision of a role model. Their own competence in general practice care is important in this regard. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a quality assessment programme could identify the strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers in four main domains of general practice care.

METHODS

The quality assessment programme comprised validated tests on four domains of general practice: general medical knowledge, knowledge of medical-technical skills, consultation skills and practice management. The criterion for the identification of relative strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers was a variation in the scores of trainers indicating higher and lower scores (strengths and weaknesses) within each domain.

RESULTS

GP trainers (n=105) were invited to participate in the study and 90% (n=94) did so. The variation in scores allowed the indication of strengths and weaknesses. Main strengths were: general medical knowledge of the digestive system; knowledge of medical skills relating to the skin; consultation skills concerning empathy; practice management with regard to accessibility. Main weaknesses were: general medical knowledge of the neurological system; knowledge of the medical/technical skills relating to the endocrine metabolic and nutritional system; consultation skills regarding shared decision making; practice management involving cooperation with staff and other care providers.

DISCUSSION

This first systematic evaluation of GP trainers identified their strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses identified will be used in the improvement process as topics for collective improvement in the GP trainers' general curriculum and in individual learning plans.