More effective assessment of adverse effects and comorbidities in epilepsy: results of a Phase II communication study.

Research was conducted to evaluate conversations about epilepsy between community-based neurologists and patients. Adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs and mood/behavioral issues were infrequently discussed, and neurologists and patients disagreed about these issues postvisit. Follow-up research was conducted to assess the impact of a previsit assessment tool on discussions of epilepsy. Twenty neurologists reviewed a tool incorporating questions from validated instruments (Adverse Events Profile [AEP] and Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy [NDDI-E]). Naturally occurring interactions between neurologists and 60 patients were recorded. Neurologists and patients were interviewed separately. All components were transcribed and analyzed using sociolinguistics. Using the previsit assessment tool increased the number of discussions about adverse effects and mood/behavioral issues and increased neurologist-patient agreement about issues postvisit. Visit length did not increase significantly when the tool was used. Ten months after follow-up research, 50% of neurologists reported continuing to use the tool in everyday practice with patients with epilepsy.

Improving Communication in ADHD Care: Results from In-office Linguistic Research.

UNLABELLED: IntroductionAn in-office linguistic study was conducted to help improve understanding of how to better evaluate and treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Naturally occurring interactions were recorded among 7 psychiatrists and 23 patients and 8 pediatricians along with 22 patients and their parents. Participants were interviewed separately post-visit. Transcripts of interactions and interviews were analyzed using sociolinguistic techniques. RESULTS: Visits were variable in length and lacked concrete treatment plans. In the pediatric setting, children were typically excluded from dialogues, accounting for only 8% of words spoken. School was the primary metric used to evaluate symptoms. Pediatricians allayed parents' concerns about stimulant therapy by promising to prescribe the lowest possible dose, rather than discussing titrating to an optimal dose. Adults were evaluated idiosyncratically without the use of scales or tools. Stimulants were positioned as short-term "trials" without strong physician recommendations.DiscussionConversations about stimulant therapy lacked goal- and expectation-setting. Also missing from conversations was a definitive treatment plan based on the core symptoms of ADHD. Incorporating open-ended questions and tools or rating scales may result in a more effective and efficient in-office dialogue. CONCLUSION: Further research is warranted to assess the efficacy of communication strategies to enhance in-office discussions of ADHD and stimulant therapy.

Effect of patient-centered communication training on discussion and detection of nonadherence in glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To assess communication about adherence and to determine the impact of communication skills training on physicians' approach to nonadherence. DESIGN: Sociolinguistic analysis of videotaped community ophthalmologists' encounters with patients with glaucoma before and after training. Patients in both phases and physicians in phase I knew communication was being studied but not what the focus of the study was. In phase II, physicians knew the targeted communication behaviors. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three ophthalmologists and 100 regularly scheduled patients with glaucoma (50 per phase). METHODS: An educational program with videotaped vignettes of simulated patient encounters using audience response and role play to teach patient-centered communication skills, including a 4-step adherence assessment and the use of open-ended questions in ask-tell-ask sequences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician eliciting an acknowledgment of nonadherence during a clinical encounter compared with acknowledgment of nonadherence during a postvisit research interview (primary outcome), and performance of targeted communication and substantive discussion of adherence. RESULTS: After intervention, physicians increased the proportion of open-ended questions (15% vs 6%; P = 0.001) and specifically about medication taking (82% compared with 18% of encounters; P<0.001). Compared with the absence of ask-tell-ask communication, 32% of phase II encounters included a complete ask-tell-ask sequence, 78% included an ask-tell sequence, and 32% a tell-ask sequence (P<0.001). Three of 4 steps for assessment of adherence were more common in phase II, and substantial discussions of adherence occurred in 86% versus 30% of encounters (P<0.001). In phase II, physicians elicited acknowledgment of nonadherence in 78% (7/9) of those who acknowledged nonadherence in the postvisit interview compared with 25% in phase I (3/12; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that experienced community physicians significantly improved their communication strategies and ability to detect and address nonadherence after a 3-hour educational program. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Doctor-patient communication in glaucoma care: analysis of videotaped encounters in community-based office practice.

PURPOSE: To assess doctor-patient communication in patients with glaucoma. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three ophthalmologists and 50 patients with glaucoma. METHODS: Doctor-patient encounters were audio- and videotaped and analyzed using validated sociolinguistic approaches. After the visit, the doctor and the patient completed questionnaires, and patients were interviewed using a semistructured, patient-centered protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Summary statistics about doctor-patient encounters, assessment of alignment of attitudes between patients and doctors, and patient admission to missing doses. RESULTS: Physicians spent an average of 8.0 (standard deviation [SD], 3.1; median, 7.8) minutes in the room with the patient and an average of 5.8 (SD, 2.4; median, 7.5) minutes talking with the patient, delivering 70% of all spoken words and asking two thirds of all questions. Glaucoma-related discussion occupied 50% of talk time and was focused primarily on examinations and treatment (25%). One third of discussions addressed ocular issues other than glaucoma. Virtually all physician questions (94%) were closed ended. Most patient questions were about intraocular pressure (20% of visits), details of the medication regimen (20%), disease status (14%), and testing (12%). Although physicians and patients were aligned in believing that the physician should control the visit agenda, physicians tended to support greater physician control of decision making than did patients. Physicians failed to identify most patients who admitted to missing doses, a surrogate for nonadherence, stating that 10 of 13 in this category were taking drops "all" or "most" of the time. Physician interviews detected 3 of the 11 patients whose postvisit questionnaire indicated missing a dose in the last week compared with 11 of the 11 detected by the postvisit research interview. Patients who stated they had missed doses recently reported being less satisfied with the doctor-patient encounter than those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Doctor-patient dialogue was universally physician centered; physicians spoke 70% of the words and asked closed-ended questions that restricted the patient's contribution to "yes/no" or brief responses. A minority of physicians ever asked patients if they had questions. In contrast with the patient-centered research interview, doctors' physician-centered communication failed to identify most patients who had missed doses.

Conversations between community-based neurologists and patients with epilepsy: results of an observational linguistic study.

An in-office linguistic study was conducted to assess neurologist-patient discussions of epilepsy. Naturally occurring interactions among 20 neurologists and 60 of their patients with epilepsy were recorded. Participants were interviewed separately postvisit. Transcripts were analyzed using sociolinguistic techniques. Of 59 patients taking antiepileptic drugs previsit, 44 (75%) discussed side effects with their neurologist. Side effect discussions were most often neurologist initiated. Postvisit, patients and neurologists often disagreed about which side effects were experienced. The presence of a caregiver (e.g., spouse) usually resulted in lengthier, more detailed discussions of side effects, without drastically increasing overall visit length. Discussions of mood- and behavior-related comorbidities occurred infrequently (14 of 60 visits); postvisit, neurologists stated that they felt that management of these conditions was outside their area of expertise. Communication gaps observed in discussions of epilepsy and its treatment warrant further exploration. Additional research is currently underway to assess the efficacy of a previsit assessment tool.

A linguistic analysis of in-office dialogue among psychiatrists, parents, and child and adolescent patients with ADHD.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate in-office discussions of ADHD and psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: Naturally occurring interactions among 11 psychiatrists, 32 patients and their parents were recorded, with a focus on "complicated" patients (i.e., having or suspected to have >or= 1 psychiatric comorbidities and/or learning disabilities in addition to ADHD). Participants were interviewed separately post visit. Transcripts were analyzed using validated sociolinguistic methodologies. RESULTS: Some 62% of patients were male, with an average age of 12.5 years, and 79% had a family history of ADHD. Visits were psychiatrist-driven, focusing on medication management and school performance, leaving management of comorbidities largely unaddressed. Post visit, 78% of parents and psychiatrists disagreed on patients' "most concerning behavior." Parents most often reported concern about aggression and oppositionality. Psychiatrists and parents emphasized different aspects of patients' personality, using deficit- and strength-based models, respectively. CONCLUSION: Psychiatrists and parents interpreted the relationship between ADHD and comorbidities differently. The significant incidence of misalignment regarding worrisome behaviors warrants further exploration.