Communication Skills in Patient-Doctor Interactions: Learning from Patient Complaints

Kee, J.; Khoo, Hoon‐Eng; Lim, Issac; Koh, Mervyn

doi:10.1016/j.hpe.2017.03.006

Cited by 164 publications

(178 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Alongside a detailed scientific knowledge of their chosen specialty, doctors must cultivate an effective communication style to foster clinical relationships that are therapeutic in nature. [1,2] Communicative abilities are once again the focus of concern in many postgraduate clinical education curricula, with some authors proposing that effective verbal communication be regarded as an obligatory competency to be acquired during training. [3] Effective communication enables patients to offer essential details in their history which permit enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, greater awareness of the patient's needs and, possibly, to facilitate better symptomatic management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Communication Breakdowns – Uninformative Doctors Or Ignorant Patients?

Cingi¹,

Yalım²

2018

ENT Updates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the patients will form opinions of the clinician based on such behavior. [2] Effective communication underlies the doctor-patient relationship, from initial diagnostic interview to the planning of treatment. Verbal and non-verbal communicative behaviours alike are vital components of clinical practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication Breakdowns – Uninformative Doctors Or Ignorant Patients?

Cingi¹,

Yalım²

2018

ENT Updates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the well-established communication trainings for physicians and qualified personnel, there is a need for improvement. Kee et al [17] also reached this conclusion. They identified issues in verbal and non-verbal communication skills and a lack of good listening skills.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Why Do Cancer Patients Have Difficulties Evaluating the Need for a Second Opinion and What Is Needed to Lower the Barrier? A Qualitative Study

Peier-Ruser

Greyerz

2018

Oncol Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Requesting a second opinion (SO) is common in oncology. The reasons and barriers for patients not seeking an SO have yet been to be investigated. Why do patients have difficulties evaluating their need for an SO and what could be done to minimize these barriers? Patients and Methods: A 2-stage qualitative study was conducted. 1) Participants were studied in 3 focus groups (FGs). The participants themselves analyzed and then grouped their statements into defined categories. 2) Results of the FGs were discussed with 7 experts from different professional backgrounds. The interviews were unstructured and detailed in the protocol. The statements underwent thematic analysis. Results: The following 4 main barriers were identified: 1) state of shock, 2) pressure of time, 3) sense of excessive demands and uncertainty triggered by information overload, 4) fear of jeopardizing the patient-physician relationship. The following 4 main suggestions for minimizing the barriers were identified: 1) written patient information, 2) improvement of communication, 3) patient empowerment (PE), 4) holistic approach. Conclusion: These barriers incapacitate the patients from evaluating the need for an SO. To minimize the barriers, PE, self-management support and shared decision making is recommended. While the implementation of these concepts advances, patients can be empowered by psycho-oncological assistance.

show abstract

“…Patient's perceptions are subjective and they themselves can influence study outcomes through a subjective bias that is influenced by their mental and physical status 20 . These factors are left unaccounted in RCTs like the one reported here.…”

Section: Beyond Blinding To the Doctor-patient Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Possible implications and clinical value of commercially sponsored evaluations: discussion on research methodology

Chapman-Jones

Lusher

2019

J Wound Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is written in response to a publication in the Journal of Wound Care by Guest et al. The publication and subsequent analysis of the Guest paper provides a vehicle for a wider debate about the care of people with wounds; including who manages the wound, how resources are allocated and the use of supplement technologies. It also raises a further important issues regarding whether the outcomes from a single randomised control trial (RCT) provides a more reliable level of evidence than the findings of previous investigations involving observational trials.This article analyses the results from the cited study comparing clinical outcomes from previous published studies and evaluates whether a conclusion may be reached as to the most appropriate and reliable method to assess the efficacy of such medical devices used in wound care. It discusses why the assessment of clinical evidence can be a problem when there is variance of outcomes in studies which use different research methodologies.The hierarchy of evidence lies at the heart of the appraisal process; and within healthcare it is common that smaller commercial companies present small scale observational trials as evidence for the efficacy of the product they are promoting. This practice is commonly followed because these trials are relatively cheap in comparison to research involving more complex methodologies, have significantly shorter durations and commonly patients are selected by clinicians to produce a likely or desired outcome. Therefore, we question whether this level of data promoted as evidence for clinical efficacy should be dismissed?Guest et al reported that in UK within wound care clinical practice is inconsistent with significant regional variations; therefore, unless clinical practice guidelines are strictly enforced in a study, which then may be unrepresentative of current clinical practice does it mean that any results produced could not be transferred to the current clinical environment? We discuss the conundrum.

show abstract

Communication Skills in Patient-Doctor Interactions: Learning from Patient Complaints

Cited by 164 publications

References 41 publications

Communication Breakdowns – Uninformative Doctors Or Ignorant Patients?

Communication Breakdowns – Uninformative Doctors Or Ignorant Patients?

Why Do Cancer Patients Have Difficulties Evaluating the Need for a Second Opinion and What Is Needed to Lower the Barrier? A Qualitative Study

Possible implications and clinical value of commercially sponsored evaluations: discussion on research methodology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About