Christa Zimmermann

Cues and concerns by patients in medical consultations: A literature review.

The aim of the current article is to review the peer-reviewed research literature on cues and concerns published between 1975 and 2006. To be included, articles had to report observational studies based on patient-physician consultations and report findings on patient expressions of cues and/or concerns. Quantitative and qualitative studies from different medical settings were considered. Fifty-eight original articles based on the analysis of audio- or videotaped medical consultations were tracked down. Definition of cues and concerns and methodological approaches differed widely. Physicians missed most cues and concerns and adopted behaviors that discouraged disclosure. Communication training improved the detection of cues and concerns. Future research progress would require different methodological approaches more appropriate for studying verbal interactions and the complexity of the various levels that influence interactions.

A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries

OBJECTIVE To describe the methodological procedures of a multi-centre focus group research for obtaining content categories also suitable for categorical statistical analyses. METHODS Inductive content analyses were performed on a subsample of 27 focus groups conducted in three different countries, the Netherlands (Utrecht), the UK (Liverpool) and Italy (Verona). The analyses of the subsample of focus group discussions were performed in five steps: (1) independent development of content categories in each of the participating centres, (2) obtaining consensus categories, (3) creation of a manual with coding rules and defining criteria for categories and subcategories, (4) assessment of inter-rater reliability to identify unreliable categories to be revised, and (5) repetition of inter-rater reliability assessment. RESULTS The resulting coding system considers five areas: non verbal communication, process oriented expression, task oriented or problem focused expressions, affective or emotional expressions, and physicians personal characteristics. It contains 12 categories of acceptable inter-rater reliability and 41 subcategories. CONCLUSION The coding procedures show how focus group data, obtained in an international multi-centre study can be analysed in a systematic way combining scientific rigour with the richness of data obtainable from qualitative methodologies. PRACTICE IMPLICATION The applied procedures may be helpful for multi-centre focus group research on other topics.

Involving patients in decisions during psychiatric consultations

BACKGROUND Patient involvement in the decision-making process is a key element for good clinical practice. Few data are available on patient involvement in psychiatry. AIMS To assess in a psychiatric out-patient context how psychiatrists involve patients in therapeutic decisions and to determine the extent to which patient and psychiatrist characteristics contribute to patient involvement. METHOD Eighty transcripts from audiotaped first out-patient consultations, conducted by 16 psychiatrists, were rated with the OPTION (observing patient involvement) scale. Interrater reliability indices were obtained for 30 randomly selected interviews. Associations between OPTION scores and some clinical and socio-demographic variables were tested using t-test, ANOVA and Pearsons correlation coefficient where appropriate. The distribution of scores for each psychiatrist was assessed by intracluster correlation coefficients. RESULTS Interrater reliability and internal consistency of the OPTION scale in the psychiatric setting were satisfactory. The total score and the ratings for the single OPTION items showed a skewed distribution, with a prevalence of scores in the low range of abilities, corresponding to minimal attempts to involve patients or a minimal skill level. CONCLUSIONS The OPTION scale proves to be a reliable instrument to assess patient involvement in a psychiatric setting. Psychiatrists showed poor patient involvement abilities parallel to previous findings in psychiatry and primary care. They need to be encouraged to share treatment decisions with their patients and to apply patient involvement skills. Further research is needed to establish which patient variables and clinical settings in psychiatry are more amenable to shared decisions, and how participation of psychiatric patients in treatment decisions will affect the outcome.

Communication skills in psychiatry residents-- how do they handle patient concerns? An application of sequence analysis to interviews with simulated patients.

Background: The main focus of the training of psychiatrists is on diagnosis and treatment based on the traditional doctor-centered approach to the psychiatric interview. Less attention is given to the correct handling of patients’ emotional concerns, which is crucial for the patient-physician relationship, but also for improving diagnostic and treatment decisions. The aim of this study is to assess psychiatrists’ responses to patients’ concerns and worries. Method: 118 consultations, conducted by 10 residents in psychiatry with 20 simulated patients, have been coded using the Verona Psychiatric Interview Classification System. Lag1 sequential analysis and a multinomial logit regression analysis were performed to investigate the relationship between patients’ expressions of concern and psychiatrists’ subsequent interventions in terms of patient-centered skills. Results: Compared to doctor-centered interventions, all patients’ expressions of concern increased the probability of passive listening (odds ratios between 2.4 and 4.2). They also increased the occurrence of emotion focusing interventions (odds ratios between 3.3 and 1.7), which however remained rare (4% of residents’ total responses). A small although significant increase in the likelihood of active listening expressions was observed as a response to two types of patient expressions of concern: statements of feelings (odds ratio 1.4) and expression of opinions regarding problematic psychosocial issues (odds ratio of 1.7). Conclusions: Young psychiatrists are good passive listeners but need to improve active listening skills which, together with emotion focusing skills, should be a major learning target in psychiatry. These patient-centered interviewing skills should integrate those traditionally used for attributing ICD-10 and/or DSM-IV categories.

Framing of outcome and probability of recurrence: breast cancer patients' choice of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in hypothetical patient scenarios.

AbstractPurpose.To examine the effects of framing of outcome and probabilities of cancer occurrence on the treatment preference which breast cancer patients indicate for hypothetical patient scenarios. Methods.A modified version of the Decision Board Instrument (Levine et al. 1992) was administered to 35 breast cancer patients with past ACT experience. Patients expressed their choice regarding ACT for six scenarios which were characterized by either negative or positive framing of outcome and by one of the three levels of probability of recurrence (high, medium, low). Results.The framing had no influence on ACT choices over all three probability levels. The majority chose ACT for high and medium risk and one third switched from ACT to No ACT in the low-risk condition. This switch was statistically significant. Conclusion.Hypothetical treatment decisions against ACT occur only when the probability of recurrence is low and the benefit of ACT is small. This finding for patients with past experience of ACT is similar to those reported for other oncological patient groups still in treatment.

The biopsychosocial domains and the functions of the medical interview in primary care: construct validity of the Verona Medical Interview Classification System

Factor analysis (FA) is a powerful method of testing the construct validity of coding systems of the medical interview. The study uses FA to test the underlying assumptions of the Verona Medical Interview Classification System (VR-MICS). The relationship between factor scores and patient characteristics was also examined. The VR-MICS coding categories consider the three domains of the biopsychosocial model and the main functions of the medical interview-data gathering, relationship building and patient education. FA was performed on the frequencies of the VR-MICS categories based on 238 medical interviews. Seven factors (62.5% of variance explained) distinguished different strategies patients and physicians use to exchange information, build a relationship and negotiate treatment within the domains of the biopsychosocial model. Three factors, Psychological, Social Inquiry and Management of Patient Agenda, were related to patient data: sociodemographic (female gender, age and employment), social (stressful events), clinical (GHQ-12 score), personality (chance external health locus of control) and clinical characteristics (psychiatric history, chronic illness, attributed presence of emotional distress).

A multi-element psychosocial intervention for early psychosis (GET UP PIANO TRIAL) conducted in a catchment area of 10 million inhabitants: study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundMulti-element interventions for first-episode psychosis (FEP) are promising, but have mostly been conducted in non-epidemiologically representative samples, thereby raising the risk of underestimating the complexities involved in treating FEP in ‘real-world’ services.Methods/DesignThe Psychosis early Intervention and Assessment of Needs and Outcome (PIANO) trial is part of a larger research program (Genetics, Endophenotypes and Treatment: Understanding early Psychosis - GET UP) which aims to compare, at 9 months, the effectiveness of a multi-component psychosocial intervention versus treatment as usual (TAU) in a large epidemiologically based cohort of patients with FEP and their family members recruited from all public community mental health centers (CMHCs) located in two entire regions of Italy (Veneto and Emilia Romagna), and in the cities of Florence, Milan and Bolzano. The GET UP PIANO trial has a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled design. The randomized units (clusters) are the CMHCs, and the units of observation are the centers’ patients and their family members. Patients in the experimental group will receive TAU plus: 1) cognitive behavioral therapy sessions, 2) psycho-educational sessions for family members, and 3) case management. Patient enrolment will take place over a 1-year period. Several psychopathological, psychological, functioning, and service use variables will be assessed at baseline and follow-up. The primary outcomes are: 1) change from baseline to follow-up in positive and negative symptoms’ severity and subjective appraisal; 2) relapse occurrences between baseline and follow-up, that is, episodes resulting in admission and/or any case-note records of re-emergence of positive psychotic symptoms. The expected number of recruited patients is about 400, and that of relatives about 300. Owing to the implementation of the intervention at the CMHC level, the blinding of patients, clinicians, and raters is not possible, but every effort will be made to preserve the independency of the raters. We expect that this study will generate evidence on the best treatments for FEP, and will identify barriers that may hinder its feasibility in ‘real-world’ clinical settings, patient/family conditions that may render this intervention ineffective or inappropriate, and clinical, psychological, environmental, and service organization predictors of treatment effectiveness, compliance, and service satisfaction.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01436331

What do people appreciate in physicians' communication? An international study with focus groups using videotaped medical consultations

The literature shows that the quality of communication is usually determined from a professional perspective. Patients or lay people are seldom involved in the development of quality indicators or communication.

INvolvement of breast CAncer patients during oncological consultations: A multicentre randomised controlled trial-the INCA study protocol

Introduction Studies on patient involvement show that physicians make few attempts to involve their patients who ask few questions if not facilitated. On the other hand, the patients who participate in the decision-making process show greater treatment adherence and have better health outcomes. Different methods to encourage the active participation during oncological consultation have been described; however, similar studies in Italy are lacking. The aims of the present study are to (1) assess the effects of a preconsultation intervention to increase the involvement of breast cancer patients during the consultation, and (2) explore the role of the attending companions in the information exchange during consultation. Methods and analysis All female patients with breast cancer who attend the Oncology Out-patient Services for the first time will provide an informed consent to participate in the study. They are randomly assigned to the intervention or to the control group. The intervention consists of the presentation of a list of relevant illness-related questions, called a question prompt sheet. The primary outcome measure of the efficacy of the intervention is the number of questions asked by patients during the consultation. Secondary outcomes are the involvement of the patient by the oncologist; the patients perceived achievement of her information needs; the patients satisfaction and ability to cope; the quality of the doctor–patient relationship in terms of patient-centeredness; and the number of questions asked by the patients companions and their involvement during the consultation. All outcome measures are supposed to significantly increase in the intervention group. Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the local Ethics Committee of the Hospital Trust of Verona. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01510964

A theory‐based proposal to evaluate patient‐centred communication in medical consultations: The Verona Patient‐centred Communication Evaluation scale (VR‐COPE)

– The prupose of this paper is to present the development of the Verona Patient‐Centred Communication Evaluation (VR‐COPE) scale, together with its psychometric properties. The nine item rating scale assesses the content and relational aspects of patient‐centred communication during medical consultations on the basis of a multidimensional evaluation as suggested by the more recent literature in the field. Each item is defined by operational definitions., – A sample of 246 transcribed primary care consultations was rated with the VR‐COPE. Explorative factor analysis, Pearson correlation coefficients and internal consistency using Cronbachs alpha were calculated. Convergent validity with the Verona Medical Interview Classification System (VR‐MICS) was also tested. A sub sample of 32 consultations was used to assess inter‐rater reliability., – Interrater reliability and internal consistency were good (overall Cronbach alpha=0.75). Four factors (explaining 74 per cent of the variance) were extracted by exploratory factor analysis. Six items of the VR‐COPE correlated significantly with specific communication skills evidenced by the VR‐MICS and pertained to the physicians ability to explore medical or psychosocial issues. The VR‐COPE items on interview structure and shared decision, more related to process than to specific skills, had no equivalent in the VR‐MICS., – The new rating scale responds to the need in communication research for a multidimensional scale that combines the evaluation of specific skills and process aspects.