Do physicians communicate the adverse effects of medications that older patients want to hear?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physicians routinely discuss adverse effects of medications, but whether discussions match older patients' desire for information is unexplored. This study compares patient preferences for adverse effect discussions with reported physician practice. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 100 practicing primary care physicians from 9 medical groups and 178 patients recruited from 11 senior centers in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Physicians listed the adverse effects they typically discuss when prescribing an ACE inhibitor. Patients were given a hypothetical scenario about a new medication prescription, and were asked to circle the three adverse effects they most wanted to hear about from a list. RESULTS: More than 90 % of patients wanted a physician to discuss medication adverse effects: they wanted information about both dangerous (75 % of patients) and common (66 % of patients) adverse effects. However, patients most commonly chose to hear about adverse effects occurring for < 1 % of patients and selected a wide range of adverse effects for discussion. Physicians reported most frequently educating patients about more common and life-threatening adverse effects. Patients who wanted to discuss more adverse effects were more worried about adverse effects than those wishing to hear fewer (4.0 vs. 3.4 on a 5-point Likert scale; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: For the studied medication, there was little concordance between the medication adverse effects physicians say they discuss and what patients want to hear. Physicians cannot practically verbally satisfy patients' information desires about the adverse effects of new medications during time-compressed office visits. Innovative solutions are needed.

Provider and patient expectations for dietary supplement discussions.

BACKGROUND: Dietary supplement use in the United States is common. Patients can procure supplements without a prescription, and often do not disclose supplement use to their healthcare providers. Providers and patients may be uncertain about what would be appropriate or helpful in discussions of supplements during routine office visits. OBJECTIVE: To explore provider and patient expectations for discussions of dietary supplements. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of healthcare providers from three specialties and their patients who reported taking supplements. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five outpatient providers (14 primary care, six integrative medicine, and 15 complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers) and 107 of their patients. APPROACH: Qualitative analysis of transcripts using grounded theory and iterative review. RESULTS: Both providers and patients raised twelve common topics about dietary supplements that they felt were important to discuss during office visits, such as: supplements taken; supplement risks (interactions, safety/harm, side effects/adverse events); treatment benefits; efficacy; alternative treatments; and patient expectations/preferences for treatment. Some topics were mentioned more frequently by providers than patients, such as how to take, reason for taking, and evidence for use. Providers raised several topics that were mentioned infrequently by patients. Supplement costs and regulations were not brought up by any patients, even though consideration of these topics could influence patient decisions to take supplements. Complementary healthcare providers brought up topics not mentioned by primary care providers, such as the importance of supplement brands and supplement mega-dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers have concordant views about the need to discuss patient supplement use and ensure patient safety. Patients may undervalue, be unaware of, or discount information about cost or regulations that could affect their decision-making about supplement use. Future studies could examine the value, acceptability, and influence of a more comprehensive approach to discussions to help patients appropriately evaluate supplements.

Disclosing and responding to cancer "fears" during oncology interviews.

Video-excerpts from routine oncology interviews are examined to reveal how patients demonstrate and doctors respond to "fears" about cancer. Vocally and visually, embodied impacts of dealing with dreaded consequences of cancer are apparent when addressing both good and potentially bad cancer news. Even a "brush" with cancer can promote negative and ongoing impacts provoking unresolved illness dilemmas. We reveal how, in the midst of extending answers and initiating concerns, patients exhibit trepidations when volunteering narrative information about their medical history and experience of symptoms. In response, doctors are shown to acknowledge yet exhibit minimal receptiveness to patients' lifeworld disclosures and demonstrations (e.g., redirecting attention away from patients' concerns by offering "textbook" symptoms and related pursuits of biomedical agendas). Discussion focuses on interactional criteria for identifying "fears", patients' lay orientations to medical visits, and implications for refining educational workshops for oncologists.

Physician-patient communication about dietary supplements.

OBJECTIVE: Describe the content and frequency of provider-patient dietary supplement discussions during primary care office visits. METHODS: Inductive content analysis of 1477 transcribed audio-recorded office visits to 102 primary care providers was combined with patient and provider surveys. Encounters were collected in Los Angeles, CA (2009-2010), geographically diverse practice settings across the United States (2004-2005), and Sacramento, CA (1998-1999). RESULTS: Providers discussed 738 dietary supplements during encounters with 357 patients (24.2% of all encounters in the data). They mentioned: (1) reason for taking the supplement for 46.5% of dietary supplements; (2) how to take the supplement for 28.2%; (3) potential risks for 17.3%; (4) supplement effectiveness for 16.7%; and (5) supplement cost or affordability for 4.2%. Of these five topics, a mean of 1.13 (SD=1.2) topics were discussed for each supplement. More topics were reviewed for non-vitamin non-mineral supplements (mean 1.47 (SD=1.2)) than for vitamin/mineral supplements (mean 0.99 (SD=1.1); p<0.001). CONCLUSION: While discussions about supplements are occurring, it is clear that more discussion might be needed to inform patient decisions about supplement use. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians could more frequently address topics that may influence patient dietary supplement use, such as the risks, effectiveness, and costs of supplements.