The science of communication, the art of medicine (original) (raw)
Related papers
The art of communication in medicine
Effective communication is an essential skill in general practice consultations. The art of communication is the development of effective skills and finding a style of communication that suits the clinician and produces benefits for both patient and doctor.
Several scholars have provided blueprints, and some have begun to conduct work which incorporates their ideas. If more communication scholars heed their advice and follow their lead, the discipline can provide invaluable insight and information to help organizations worldwide to address the enduring, important issue of diversity in the workplace.
Clinical Research Communication Breakdowns - Uninformative Doctors Or Ignorant Patients
Objective: Communication issues within clinical encounters are increasing within Turkey. To raise awareness of the problem and identify solutions, it was decided to undertake the current research. Methods: Separate questionnaires, one for doctors, the other for patients, were prepared and distributed between May and July 2018 to 100 doctors plus 100 adult patients at either Adana Numune Hospital or Eskisehir Osmangazi University Hospital. Results: Patients' views: 60% responded that doctors give insufficient information in terms of quality and quantity. 80% stated that the doctor failed to convey a clear message. 40% described doctors as lacking enthusiasm in explaining the issue and curtailing the conversation. 40% felt that the inadequate length of the consultation contributed to a sense that the patient was undervalued by the doctor. 40% felt consultation times needed to be lengthened. 20% stated that the doctors listened inadequately. 30% felt that communication would be improved by better use of Turkish equivalents for latinate medical terms. 10% felt that the key element in communication was for doctors first to value patients. Doctors' views: 100% felt they had the ability to explain, but that time constraints and patients' inability to understand key elements hinder communication. 95% felt the issue rested with patients and their inability to comprehend. 60% considered the patients insufficiently educated or lacking adequate intellectual resources to understand. 90% proposed lengthening consultation times to improve communication. Conclusion: Blaming either party is not the solution. Short consultation times are the root cause of miscom-munication and need to increase if communication is to improve. Improvements in patients' education may in the future lead to more fruitful clinical encounters. Clinicians must develop an effective communication style to create healthier relationships with their patients.
Breaking bad news: doctors’ skills in communicating with patients
Sao Paulo Medical Journal
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Breaking bad news is one of doctors’ duties and it requires them to have some skills, given that this situation is difficult and distressful for patients and their families. Moreover, it is also an uncomfortable condition for doctors. The aim of this study was to evaluate doctors’ capacity to break bad news, ascertain which specialties are best prepared for doing this and assess the importance of including this topic within undergraduate courses. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational cross-sectional quantitative study conducted at a university hospital in Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil. METHODS: This study used a questionnaire based on the SPIKES protocol, which was answered by 121 doctors at this university hospital. This questionnaire investigated their attitudes, posture, behavior and fears relating to breaking bad news. RESULTS: The majority of the doctors did not have problems regarding the concept of bad news. Nevertheless, their abilities diverged depending on...
“We Came to Talk with the People Behind the Disease:” Communication and Control in Medical Education
Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 2006
To explore the ways in which biomedical culture responds to the new curricular addition of communication skills training, we observed activities related to the communication skills training of a class of 70 first-year medical students in an Israeli medical school during 2002-3. In addition, focus groups were conducted with medical students (n = 210) during 1998-2001. A gap was found between the rhetoric of ''patient-centered communication'' and ''empathy'' and the traditional concerns of medical authority, efficiency, and scientism. Communication skills and empathy training were appropriated into medical socialization by being reconstructed as clinical competence. Findings are further discussed in the context of medical professionalism, Israeli culture, service acting and service roles, and organizational learning.
Medical Teacher, 2011
This AMEE Guide in Medical Education is Part 1 of a two part Guide covering the issues of Communication. This Guide has been written to provide guidance for those involved in planning the assessment of clinical communication and provides guidance and information relating to the assessment of various aspects of clinical communication; its underlying theory; its practical ability to show that an individual is competent and its relationship to students' daily performance. The advantages and disadvantages of assessing specific aspects of communication are also discussed. The Guide draws attention to the complexity of assessing the ability to communicate with patients and healthcare professionals, with issues of reliability and validity being highlighted for each aspect. Current debates within the area of clinical communication teaching are raised: when should the assessment of clinical communication occur in undergraduate medical education?; should clinical communication assessment be integrated with clinical skills assessment, or should the two be separate?; how important should the assessment of clinical communication be, and the question of possible failure of students if they are judged not competent in communication skills? It is the aim of the authors not only to provide a useful reference for those starting to develop their assessment processes, but also provide an opportunity for review and debate amongst those who already assess clinical communication within their curricula, and a resource for those who have a general interest in medical education who wish to learn more about communication skills assessment. is currently a Senior Teaching Fellow and Convenor of communication skills at the Medical School, University of St Andrews, UK. She is also deputy module co-ordinator for a second-year module. She became interested in medical education in 2005 when she joined the Health Psychology group within the school. Her current research Communication skills 7 interests are psychological and cognitive factors affecting communication and pedagogy. JO HART, PhD, is a Director of 2011 Programme Delivery & Development at Manchester Medical School, University of Manchester, UK. She is a Chartered Health Psychologist and has a PhD in health psychology and medical education. Her research interest is primarily in the area of behaviour change, along with work in factors affecting prediction of communication ability, and the process and effect of feedback.
Advances in simulation, 2024
Background Although speaking up is lauded as a critical patient safety strategy, it remains exceptionally challenging for team members to enact. Existing efforts to address the problem of silence among interprofessional teams involve training low-authority members to use direct language and unambiguous challenge scripts. The role or value of indirect communication in preventing medical error remains largely unexplored despite its pervasiveness among interprofessional teams. This study explores the role of indirect challenges in the face of medical error and professionalism lapses. Methods Obstetricians at one academic center participated in an interprofessional simulation as a partial actor. Thirteen iterations were completed with 39 participants (13 obstetrician consultants, 11 obstetric residents, 2 family medicine consultants, 5 midwives, and 8 obstetrical nurses). Thirty participants completed a subsequent semistructured interview. Five challenge moments were scripted for the obstetrician involving deliberate clinical judgment errors or professionalism infractions. Other participants were unaware of the obstetrician's partial actor role. Scenarios were videotaped; debriefs and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a constructivist qualitative approach. Results Low-authority team members primarily relied on indirect challenge scripts to promote patient safety during simulation. Faculty participants were highly receptive to indirect challenges from low-authority team members, particularly in front of awake patients. In the context of obstetric care, direct challenges were actually viewed by participants as threatening to patient trust and disruptive to the interprofessional team. Instead of exclusively focusing our efforts on encouraging low-authority team members to speak up through direct challenges, it may be fruitful to expand our attention toward teaching faculty to identify, listen for, and respond to the indirect, subtle challenges that are already prolific among interprofessional teams.