The effect of physician training and patient education on the discussion of care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic.

BACKGROUND: Care decision discussions are intended to align treatment with the patient's wishes, goals and values. To overcome the numerous barriers to such discussions, physicians as well as patients need tailored support. We evaluate the effect of a physicians' training and a conversation aid for patients about care decisions on patient and physician outcomes. METHODS: At the internal medicine outpatient clinic of the University Medical Centre Utrecht, a 1:1 randomized, parallel-group study (patient conversation aid) was combined with a pre-post intervention (physicians' training) design. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction, secondary outcomes were patient-doctor relationship, shared-decision-making, doctor preparedness and patient appreciation of the conversation aid. RESULTS: Between October 2018 and February 2020 11 physicians (36% residents, 73% female) and 185 patients (median age 58 years (interquartile range (IQR) 50-68), 60% male) participated. Only 28% of the patients reported a care decision discussion during the consultation. We found no effect of the interventions on patient satisfaction (effect sizes -0.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.56-0.27) for conversation aid; 0.04 (95% CI -0.40-0.48) for physician's training), nor on the patient-doctor relationship or shared-decision-making. However, physicians felt more prepared to discuss care decisions after training (median 3 (IQR 1-4) vs 1 (IQR 0-3), p = 0.015). Patients assessed the conversation aid informative and gave an overall mark of median 7 (IQR 7-8). CONCLUSIONS: First steps towards fruitful discussions about care decisions were made: patients considered the conversation aid informative and physicians felt better prepared to discuss care decisions after training. The low number of care decision conversations patients reported shows exactly how important it is to focus on interventions that facilitate these discussions, for both the patient and physician. Further work needs to be done to establish the best way to empower patients and physicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register, trial 6998 (NTR 7188), registered 04/05/2018, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6998 .

Bidirectional learning opportunities: How GP-supervisors and trainees exchange knowledge.

INTRODUCTION: Workplace-based learning conversations can be a good opportunity for supervisors and trainees to learn from each other. When both professionals discuss their specific knowledge openly with each other, learning conversations may be a useful educational tool, for instance for learning how to apply evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the workplace. We do, however, need a better understanding of how the exchange of knowledge provides opportunities for such bidirectional learning. The aim of this study was therefore to analyse how trainees and supervisors currently handle bidirectional learning opportunities by describing in detail how supervisors respond to knowledge expressed by trainees during a learning conversation. METHOD: We video-recorded learning conversations between supervisors and trainees in general practice (GP). Within these learning conversations, EBM discussions on medical topics were selected and transcribed. We then identified, analysed using Conversation Analysis (CA) and categorised each expression of knowledge by the trainee and the supervisor's subsequent response. RESULTS: We found that when a trainee expresses knowledge during the learning conversation, supervisors either (a) refute the expressed knowledge, (b) immediately suggest an alternative or (c) pose (additional) questions. These responses have consequences for the learning opportunities of both trainee and supervisor: it is only when supervisors pose further questions that trainees are encouraged to elaborate on their knowledge, leading to a bidirectional learning opportunity. DISCUSSION: Improving EBM learning opportunities for both supervisors and trainees requires more than simply instructing trainees to express knowledge-based-for instance-on recent evidence more often. Inflexible institutional roles related to historical claims of supervisors' epistemic authority hamper bidirectional learning. Posing open questions during learning conversations enhances the flexibility of institutional roles while also creating bidirectional learning opportunities.

Displaying concerns within telephone triage conversations of callers with chest discomfort in out-of-hours primary care: A conversation analytic study.

OBJECTIVES: In primary care out of hours service (OHS-PC), triage nurses ask questions to assign urgency level for medical assessment. A semi-automatic decision tool (the Netherlands Triage Standard, NTS) facilitates triage nurses with key questions, but does not leave much room for paying attention to callers' concerns. We wanted to understand how callers with chest pain formulate their concerns and are helped further during telephone triage. METHODS: We conducted a conversation analytic study of 68 triage calls from callers with chest discomfort who contacted OHS-PC of which we selected 35 transcripts in which concerns were raised. We analyzed expressions of concerns and the corresponding triage nurse response. RESULTS: Due to the task-oriented nature of the NTS, callers' concerns were overlooked. For callers, however, discussing concerns was relevant, stressed by the finding that the majority of callers with chest discomfort expressed concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Interactional difficulties in concern-related discussions arised directly after expressed concerns if not handled adequately, or during the switch to the counseling phase. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: When callers display concerns during telephone triage, we recommend triage nurses to explore them briefly and then return to the sequence of tasks described in the NTS-assisted triage process.

Discussing care decisions at the internal medicine outpatient clinic: A conversation analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Explore how often, when and how care decisions are discussed during consultations at an internal medicine outpatient clinic, and what we can learn from these observations. METHODS: Qualitative analysis of 150 video-taped consultations. Consultations involving a discussion of care decisions were analyzed using conversation analysis. RESULTS: 1) Only 21 of the 150 consultations involved a discussion of care decisions; 2) As there is no destined phase for the introduction of the topic of care decisions, the topic is most often introduced at the end of the phase 'treatment and course of the disease'; 3) A lot of interactional effort is needed to create common ground and make relevance clear with extensive justification. Hesitation markers, repairs and hypothetical talk show the precariousness of the topic. CONCLUSIONS: Three dilemma's need to be addressed: 1) a slot has to be created to introduce the topic of care decisions; 2) common ground has to be created, possibly over time; 3) the paradox of framing the topic as relevant 'in the future' but 'needs to be discussed now' needs to be attended to. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We recommend that physician training should address the three dilemmas. Future research should focus on how to do so.

Interactional implications of either/or-questions during telephone triage of callers with chest discomfort in out-of-hours primary care: A conversation analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the interactional implications of either/or-questions on the interaction between people who call out-of-hours services in primary care (OHS-PC) and triage nurses who use a decision support tool called the 'Netherlands Triage Standard' (NTS) during telephone triage. METHODS: A qualitative study of 68 triage conversations at six Dutch OHS-PC. Patients called the OHS-PC with symptoms, e.g. chest discomfort, suggestive of acute coronary syndrome. Using conversation analysis, we identified two categories of multiple-choice either/or-questions that indicated interactional difficulties, shown in hesitation markers within callers' responses. RESULTS: Our analysis shows that interactional difficulties mainly arise when (i) questions are poorly designed by the triage nurse; or (ii) when the caller's complaints are ambiguously presented reflecting patient's difficulties to verbalize them (e.g. "not feeling well"). CONCLUSION: The way NTS displays key diagnostic options encourages triage nurses to use multiple-choice either/or-questions. More awareness among triage nurses is needed on undesirable implications of either/or-questions on the interaction. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We recommend changing the NTS display of diagnostic options and to use questions with fewer options in order to decrease the chance of formulating ambiguous questions soliciting unclear responses. Furthermore, asking content questions when complaints are ambiguously formulated may specify the presentation of complaints.