Michela Rimondini

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.

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.

Quality of doctor-patient communication through the eyes of the patient: variation according to the patient's educational level

Abstract Good doctor–patient communication may lead to better compliance, higher patient satisfaction, and finally, better health. Although the social variance in how physicians and patients communicate is clearly demonstrated, little is known about what patients with different educational attainments actually prefer in doctor–patient communication. In this study we describe patients’ perspective in doctor–patient communication according to their educational level, and to what extent these perspectives lean towards the expert opinion on doctor–patient communication. In a multi-center study (Belgium, The Netherlands, UK and Italy), focus group discussions were organised using videotaped medical consultations. A mixed methods approach was used to analyse the data. Firstly, a difference in perspective in communication style was found between the lower educated participants versus the middle and higher educated participants. Secondly, lower educated participants referred positively most to aspects related to the affective/emotional area of the medical consultation, followed by the task-oriented/problem-focused area. Middle and higher educated participants positively referred most to the task-oriented/problem-focused area. The competency of the physician was an important category of communication for all participants, independent of social background. The results indicate that the preferences of lower educated participants lean more towards the expert opinion in doctor–patient communication than the middle and higher educated participants. Patients’ educational level seems to influence their perspective on communication style and should be taken into account by physicians. Further quantitative research is needed to confirm these results.

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

[Knowledge and informative needs of patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia, explored with focus group methods].

SUMMARY. Aims - Psychiatric patients often are not informed about their diagnosis and their involvement in the decision making process is rare. Aim of the study was to explore the informative needs of patients with schizophrenia and the knowledge about their illness. Method - Three focus groups were conducted with 25 long-stay patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia, attending the Mental Health Centre of the South-Verona Community-based Mental Health Service. The group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed. Results - The authors identified 18 different thematic categories which were used by two raters to classify all patient contributions. The interrater reliability was satisfactory. The qualitative analysis evidenced that patients have little knowledge about their illness. Patients had confuse and vague ideas on schizophrenia but their knowledge on drug names, dosages and side effects appeared precise and detailed. Several patients have looked for information in encyclopedias and medical dictionaries. Conclusion - The findings suggest a need of patients affected by schizophrenia for an information exchange with their psychiatrists that takes into account their informative needs, corrects wrong beliefs and actively involves them in therapeutic decisions.

Chronic graft versus host disease is associated with erectile dysfunction in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients: a single-center experience

Angelo Andreini , Nicola Zampieri , Claudio Costantini, Giovanni Malerba, Costanza Bruno, Gianluca Salvagno, Giuseppe Francia, Michele Gottardi, Michela Rimondini, Isacco Ferrarini, Giuseppe Lippi, Achille Ambrosetti, Fabio Benedetti and Cristina Tecchio Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplant Unit, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Department of Surgery, Pediatrics and Gynecology, Section of Pediatric Surgery, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Science, Section of Biology and Genetics, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, Section of Radiology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Science, Section of Clinical Biochemistry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Department of Medicine, Section of Endocrinology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; Hematology Unit, Ospedale C a Foncello, Treviso, Italy; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Science, Section of Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

You only have one chance for a first impression! Impact of Patients’ First Impression on the Global Quality Assessment of Doctors’ Communication Approach

ABSTRACT Patients’ first impressions obtained during early contacts with doctors represent the basis for relationship building processes. Aim of this study was to verify how patients’ first impression of doctors’ communication approach influences patients’ global assessment of doctors’ performance. This cross-sectional study was part of a larger, multicenter observational study aiming to assess lay-people’s preferences regarding patient–doctor communication. All participants (N = 136) were equally distributed over two selected Italian and Dutch recruitment centers as well as for gender and age. In each center, panels of 6–9 persons each watched the same set of eight videotaped Objective Structured Clinical Examination consultations. Participants performed different tasks as to pick up salient communication elements while watching the videos and to rate doctors’ global communicative performances on a 10-point Likert scale. We performed a mediation analysis to assess direct and indirect effects of participants’ first impression on participants’ global assessment. Among the 439 collected first impressions, 284(65%) were positive. When the first impression was positive, the mean value of the global assessment of doctors’ performance was significantly higher (M = 7.4, SD = 1.5) than when the first impression was negative (M = 6.0, SD = 1.6); t(437) = 9.0 p < .001. According to the mediation analysis, this difference was due to a direct (c’ = 0.53) and an indirect effect (ab = 0.86) deriving from the total effect of first impressions on the global assessment of doctors’ performances (c = 1.39). In conclusion, the first impression has a strong impact on positive and negative judgments on doctors’ communication approach and may facilitate or inhibit all further interactions.

Background Theories and Main Systems of Analysis of Communication in Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy

The etymology of the term “communication” comes from the Latin expression communicatio which identifies the action of sharing things. The concept of reciprocity seems therefore to be fondant in the original meaning of this word and definitely is in the connotation assumed in the present book. Indeed, in psychotherapy the healing process is mainly based on the combinations of words that allow the sharing of values, beliefs, feelings, and perceptions between two or more people. Through his narratives, the patient offers the description and significance of the presenting problems according to his perspective; the therapist has to return it enriched with a reformulation that contains elements of support and utility for the patient.