Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) grants people with disabilities access to public accommodations, including the offices of medical providers, equal to that enjoyed by persons without disabilities. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has unequivocally declared that the law requires effective communication between the medical provider and the Deaf patient. Because most medical providers are not fluent in sign language, the DOJ has recognized that effective communication calls for the use of appropriate auxiliary aids, including (...) sign language interpreters. The final decision on what to offer the Deaf patient is the doctor's, and under current DOJ regulations, the doctor does not have to consult with the patient or give "primary consideration" to the patient's choice of auxiliary aid as long as what the doctor offers results in effective communication. However, given the great variation in people's communication styles and skills, a standard, one-size-fits-all auxiliary aid would fail to achieve effective communication in many cases, harming not only that Deaf patient, but also the medical provider, who would be potentially liable for violating the ADA as well as hamstrung in getting accurate information for purposes of diagnosis and treatment. Moreover, most doctors are not savvy about Deafness and Deaf culture. Thus, the best way to ensure effective communication would be to require the medical provider to ask the Deaf patient for his or her choice of auxiliary aid and to give "primary consideration" to the patient's expressed choice of auxiliary aid. Such an approach is required under Title II of the ADA, which makes it mandatory for state and local governments to consult with people with disabilities and give "primary consideration" to the patient's choice of auxiliary aid. Given that there is no difference between a public doctor and a private doctor that would justify the two different approaches and that cost is not a factor, since under either title, a medical provider cannot pass on the costs to the person with a disability, the DOJ should revise its interpretation of Title III in order to bring in into line with its interpretation of Title II. To fail to do so would operate to frustrate both the letter and the spirit of the ADA. Until the DOJ brings the titles into line, the courts should decline to give controlling weight to the DOJ's interpretation of Title III. (shrink)

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 5, Page 15-16, May 2012.

BackgroundPaternalism/overprotection limits communication between healthcare professionals and patients and does not promote shared therapeutic decision-making. In the global north, communication patterns have been regulated to promote autonomy, whereas in the global south, they reflect the physician’s personal choices. The goal of this study was to contribute to knowledge on the communication patterns used in clinical practice in Mexico and to identify the determinants that favour a doctor–patient relationship characterized by low paternalism/autonomy.MethodsA self-report study on communication patterns (...) in a sample of 761 mental healthcare professionals in Central and Western Mexico was conducted. Multiple ordinal logistic regression models were used to analyse paternalism and associated factors.ResultsA high prevalence (68.7% [95% CI 60.0–70.5]) of paternalism was observed among mental health professionals in Mexico. The main determinants of low paternalism/autonomy were medical specialty (OR 1.67 [95% CI 1.16–2.40]) and gender, with female physicians being more likely to explicitly share diagnoses and therapeutic strategies with patients and their families (OR 1.57 [95% CI 1.11–2.22]). A pattern of highly explicit communication was strongly associated with low paternalism/autonomy (OR 12.13 [95% CI 7.71–19.05]). Finally, a modifying effect of age strata on the association between communication pattern or specialty and low paternalism/autonomy was observed.ConclusionsAmong mental health professionals in Mexico, high paternalism prevailed. Gender, specialty, and a pattern of open communication were closely associated with low paternalism/autonomy. Strengthening health professionals’ competencies and promoting explicit communication could contribute to the transition towards more autonomist communication in clinical practice in Mexico. The ethical implications will need to be resolved in the near future. (shrink)

Research documents that many chronic non-malignant pain patients experience existential, spiritual and religious needs; however, research knowledge is missing on if and how physicians approach these needs. We conducted a systematic review to explore the extent to which physicians address these needs in their communication with chronic non-malignant pain patients and to explore the facilitators and challenges of this communication. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, searching Embase, Medline, Scopus and PsycINFO. The (...) quality of the included articles was assessed based on design-specific screening tools. We included four of 2337 screened articles and found the quality to be good. Physicians’ communication about existential, spiritual and religious needs was given low priority and depended on the patients’ own initiative, except when clinicians were interested in holistic care. Patient dissatisfaction with the physician’s attention to these needs was related to higher pain and depression. Physicians’ challenges for addressing these needs were their tendency to prioritize physiological aspects and close further elaboration of existential needs when addressed by the patients. The main facilitator was the individual physician’s willingness to listen with openness and empathy to the patients’ existential concerns. A tentative conclusion is that physicians rarely meet the existential, spiritual and religious needs of their chronic non-malignant pain patients. This might be due to higher priority of physical aspects, lack of time and a lack of knowledge about the importance of and training in the ability to address these needs. Further research is needed on physicians’ communication about existential, spiritual and religious needs and on their training in here. (shrink)

Filial obligation and its implications have been little-debated in ethics. The basis of informed consent in libertarian positions may be challenged by inclusion of others beyond the immediate doctorpatient relationship. Some of the literature arguing for and against filial duty, including feminist literature, is presented as a backdrop to the argument that a patient’s family, and further, his or her community, contains the source of a broader perspective regarding decisions concerning his or her medical treatment. Communitarian models allow for a (...) medical decision to be owned by some or all stakeholders in patient outcomes. Although such a position undoubtedly confronts traditional notions of autonomy, it offers an alternative that may positively impact the practice of medicine by providing a more holistic treatment context. New models premised on shared decision-making will be presented as frameworks that may provide a theoretical basis for greater physician input into medical decisions that impact a patient’s family members and in more global terms, his or her community. (shrink)

In recent philosophy of mind a non-holistic view on concept possession, originally developed by Tyler Burge, has emerged as an alternative to holistic analyses of language mastery. The article discusses the implications of this view for analyses of communication in doctor—patient-interaction. The central question Burge's theory gives an answer to is this: to what extent must a doctor and a patient understand a medical term in the same way in order to communicate in the sense that they express the (...) same concept by the term? Many empirical studies have shown that patients do not, typically, understand medical terms in the same way as doctors they encounter. Holistic approaches therefore imply that doctors and patients seldom communicate. Burge's position, on the other hand, implies that it is sufficient that patients have a minimal understanding. In an important range of cases doctors can make sure that patients have a minimal understanding by being explicit about common dictionary definitions of the terms in question. (shrink)

The present study aims to explore the forms paternalistic communication can take in doctor–patient interactions and how they should be considered from a normative perspective. In contemporary philosophical debate, the problem with paternalism is often perceived as either undermining autonomy (the autonomy problem) or the paternalist viewing their judgment as superior (the superiority problem). In either case, paternalism is problematized mainly in a general, theoretical sense. In contrast, this paper investigates specific doctor–patient encounters, revealing distinct types of paternalistic (...) class='Hi'>communication. For this study, I reviewed videorecorded encounters from a Norwegian hospital to detect paternalism—specifically, doctors overriding patients' expressed preferences, presumably to benefit or protect the patients. I identified variations in paternalistic communication styles—termed paternalist modes—which I categorized into four types: the fighter, the advocate, the sympathizer, and the fisher. Drawing on these findings, I aim to nuance the debate on paternalism. Specifically, I argue that each paternalist mode carries its own normative implications and that the autonomy and the superiority problems manifest differently across the modes. Furthermore, by illustrating paternalism in communication through real‐life cases, I aim to reach a more comprehensive understanding of what we mean by paternalistic doctors. (shrink)

This study examined variation in medical practitioners’ practice-based conceptions of what it means to be a doctor, based on interviews with 30 clinicians who were also medical educators. Participants included general practitioners, surgeons and physicians (non-surgical specialists). Participants were asked to draw a concept map of ‘being a doctor’, followed by semi-structured interviews using a phenomenographic research design. Three conceptions were identified, varyingly focused on (1) treating patients’ medical problems; (2) maximising patients’ well-being; and (3) maximising community health. Each conception (...) was distinguished by variation in awareness of six underlying dimensions of being a doctor: (1) doctors’ actions; (2) treatment success; (3) patients’ actions; (4) patients’ well-being; (5) community needs; and (6) social justice. Whilst all participants included dimensions 1 and 2 in their described practice, numerous participants did not include dimensions 3 and 4, i.e. did not take the patients’ role and the impact of patients’ psychosocial context into account in their practice. This is concerning, especially amongst medical educators, given the widely acknowledged importance of patient-centred care in medical practice. Similarly, only some of the participants considered community health needs and felt a broader social responsibility beyond their responsibility to individual patients. These findings highlight aspects of the medical profession that need to be further emphasised in medical training and continuing professional development. (shrink)

McCabe & Healey argue that in patient‐psychiatrist interaction, the more the participants engage in repair, i.e., trying to fix potential misunderstandings, the better the outcomes of the interaction, as measured by treatment adherence and the quality of the Dr – patient relationship. This holds both for self‐repair, when psychiatrists fix their own utterances, as well as other‐repair, where patients try to fix the understanding displayed by the psychiatrist.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how hospitalized patients share decisions with physicians. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of patient-doctor communication on an inpatient medicine service among 18 hospitalized patients and 9 physicians. A research assistant (RA) approached newly hospitalized patients and their physicians before morning rounds and obtained consent. The RA audio recorded morning rounds, and then separately interviewed both patient and physician. Coding was done using integrated analysis. RESULTS: Most patients were white (61%) and half were female. (...) Most physicians were male (66%) and of Southeast Asian descent (66%). All physicians explained the plan of care to the patients; most believed that their patient understood. However, many patients did not. Physicians rarely asked the patient for their opinion. In all those cases, the decision had been made previously by the doctors. No decisions were made with the patient. Patients sometimes disagreed. CONCLUSIONS: Shared decision-making may not be the norm in hospital care. Although physicians do explain treatment plans, many hospitalized patients do not understand enough to share in decisions. When patients do assert their opinion, it can result in conflict. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Some hospitalized patients are interested in discussing treatment. Improving hospital communication can foster patient autonomy. (shrink)

From an ethical point of view, shared decision-making is preferable to either physician paternalism or patient sovereignty. The traditional model of doctor-patient communication is too directive and too unconcerned with the patient's values to support truly shared decision-making. The traditional distinction between rhetoric and sophistic can provide the basis for a new model of mutual persuasion that does not limit communication to information, and that avoids the spectre of manipulation.

The nature of the doctor-patient relationship as a keystone of care necessitates philosophical, psychological and sociological considerations. The present study investigates concepts related to these three critical views considered especially important. From the philosophical viewpoint, the three concepts of "the demands of ethics “,” ethical phenomenology and "the philosophy of the relationship" are of particular importance. From a psychological point of view, the five concepts of "communication behavior patterns", "psychic distance", "emotional quotient", "conflict between pain relief and truth-telling", and (...) "body language" have received specific emphasis. Lastly, from the sociological perspective, the three notions of "instrumental action", "communicative action", and "reaching agreement in the light of communicative action" are the most significant concepts to reconsider in the doctor-patient relationship. It should be added, however, that from the sociological point of view, the doctor-patient relationship goes beyond a two-person interaction, as the moral principles of doctors and patients depend on medical and patient ethics respectively. The theoretical foundations of the doctor-patient relationship will finally help establish the different dimensions of medical interactions. This can contribute to the development of principles and multidisciplinary bases for establishing practical ethical codes and will eventually result in a more effective doctor-patient relationship. (shrink)

This article analyzes doctor–patient communication at admission interviews in an outpatient mental health care service at a public hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina. These interviews are the first contact between professionals and patients, and they result in the admission or rejection of the latter into the medical institution. In particular, we observe how context, understood as a sociocognitive and scalar concept, is reshaped with gaze direction and agenda-setting through interaction, resulting in three hierarchical spaces which can be represented as (...) degrees in a scale: the public, the private, and the intimate level. This description will allow us to understand a series of communicative difficulties that may result from scale maladjustments, in which professionals interact with patients at different levels and therefore cannot give adequate feedback to satisfy mental health care needs. (shrink)

In this eye-opening look at the doctor-patient decision-making process, physician and law professor Jay Katz examines the time-honored belief in the virtue of silent care and patient compliance. Historically, the doctor-patient relationship has been based on a one-way trust -- despite recent judicial attempts to give patients a greater voice through the doctrine of informed consent. Katz criticizes doctors for encouraging patients to relinquish their autonomy, and demonstrates the detrimental effect their silence has on good patient care. Seeing a growing (...) need in this age of medical science and sophisticated technology for more honest and complete communication between physician and patients, he advocates a new, informed dialogue that respects the rights and needs of both sides. In a new foreword to this edition of The Silent World of Doctor and Patient , Alexander Morgan Capron outlines the changes in medical ethics practice that have occurred since the book was first published in 1984, paying particular attention to the hotly debated issues of physician-assisted suicide and informed consent in managed care. (shrink)

According to policy makers, telemedicine offers “huge opportunities to improve the quality and accessibility of health services.” It is defined as diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring, with doctors and patients separated by space but mediated through information and communication technologies. This mediation is explored through an ethnography of a U.K. teledermatology clinic. Diagnostic image transfer enables medicine at a distance, as patients are removed from knowledge generation by concentrating their identities into images. Yet that form of identity allows images and (...) the expert gaze to be brought into potentially lifesaving proximity. Following Latour’s thread, images must be captured and then mobilized to the knowledge base, where they must be stabilized into standard diagnoses, then combined with different images, waiting lists, skin lesions, dermatologists, paper records, and beds, so that ultimately, outcomes are produced. This huge task requires new knowledges and a widening of agency that, if unacknowledged, may see telemedicine projects continue to founder. (shrink)

Effective doctor patient relationships are predicated on doctors' relational engagement and affective/holistic communication with the patients. On the contrary, the contemporary healthcare and patient-clinician communication are at odds with the desirable professional goals, often resulting in dehumanization and demoralization of patients. Besides denigrating the moral agency of a patient such apathetic interactions and unprofessional approach also affect the treatment and well-being of the sufferer. Foregrounding multifaceted doctor-patient relationships, graphic pathographies are a significant cultural resource which recreate the embodied (...) moment of clinical encounters as they also lay bare qualitative tensions between patient' illness experience with doctor's professional understanding of the same. Taking these cues, the present article drawing theoretical postulates of Rita Charon, Deborah Lupton, and Havi Carel close reads Peter Dunlap-Shohl's My Degeneration: A Journey Through Parkinson's, Brian Fies' Mom's Cancer, and Stan Mack's Janet & Me: An Illustrated Story of Love and Loss to investigate the nature of doctor-patient relationship vis-à-vis communication and the implications of bad doctoring/communicative practices on patient identity and emotions. Furthermore, the article also examines the aesthetic and functional role of comics in bringing into relief the graphically mediated doctor-patient relationship. (shrink)

Effective communication and interpersonal skills have long been recognized as fundamental to the delivery of quality health care. However, there is mounting evidence that the pressures of communication in high stress work areas such as hospital emergency departments present particular challenges to the delivery of quality care. A recent report on incident management in the Australian health care system cites the main cause of critical incidents, as being poor and inadequate communication between clinicians and patients. This article (...) presents research that describes and analyses spoken interactions between health care practitioners and patients in one ED of a large, public teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia. The research aimed to address the challenges and critical incidents caused by breakdowns in communication that occur between health practitioners and patients and by refining and extending knowledge of discourse structures, to identify ways in which health care practitioners can enhance their communicative practices thereby improving the quality of the patient journey through the ED. The research used a qualitative ethnographic approach combined with discourse analysis of audio-recorded interactions. Some key findings from the analysis of data are outlined including how the absence of information about processes, the pressure of time within the ED, divergent goals of clinicians and patients, the delivery of diagnoses and professional roles impact on patient experiences. Finally, the article presents an in-depth linguistic analysis on interpersonal and experiential patterns in the discursive practices of patients, nurses and doctors. (shrink)

Artificial intelligence (AI) based clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are becoming ever more widespread in healthcare and could play an important role in diagnostic and treatment processes. For this reason, AI‐based CDSS has an impact on the doctor–patient relationship, shaping their decisions with its suggestions. We may be on the verge of a paradigm shift, where the doctor–patient relationship is no longer a dual relationship, but a triad. This paper analyses the role of AI‐based CDSS for shared decision‐making to better (...) comprehend its promises and associated ethical issues. Moreover, it investigates how certain AI implementations may instead foster the inappropriate paradigm of paternalism. Understanding how AI relates to doctors and influences doctor–patient communication is essential to promote more ethical medical practice. Both doctors' and patients' autonomy need to be considered in the light of AI. (shrink)

When I finally got eye glasses as a teenager, after denying the need for far too long, I was repeatedly surprised by the world that everyone else had been seeing all along. Leaves on the trees, graffiti by the highway—I was astonished, amazed, and suddenly informed. It is easy to assume we are seeing all we need to see, knowing all we need to know, until something jars us from this false comfort and compels us to reconsider. So it is (...) with thinking about the current state of doctor‐patient decisions. The unfocused view has physicians listening to patients and clearly communicating information about illnesses and treatment options, patients making good use of high‐quality data to craft sound decisions, and doctors joining patient preference with provider beneficence to optimize decisions. The reassuring outlook finds physician paternalism defeated, patients empowered, and all right with the world. Peter Ubel cannot let that fiction stand. In Critical Decisions: How You and Your Doctor Can Make the Right Medical Choices Together, Ubel reminds us that our work in actualizing patient autonomy and fostering patient participation in critical health decisions remains far from over. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to present a case for the value of argumentation as an instrument of rational persuasion in doctor-patient (and general health professional–patient) communication. By doing so, I also emphasize the value of argumentation theory—as a body of knowledge devoted to the study of argumentation—both to enrich the study of doctor-patient communication and to enhance its quality by contributing to dedicated training courses for health professionals and patient education interventions. Argumentation is used in health (...) professional–patient interactions, and its significance in this context has been acknowledged in recent literature (see the collection of articles in Rubinelli and .. (shrink)

Trust in the doctor-patient relationship is an indispensable structural element for the medical profession. The discourse concerning trust and its importance in the healthcare context, although quite old, elicits increasingly more interest in research, especially for empirical approaches. The importance of trust in the doctor and in the medical profession can be demonstrated by starting from the Christian meaning of illness and medicine ; generally, the patristic sources see medicine and physicians as God’s gifts. T he perception of Christian physicians (...) as dedicated, unselfish and compassionate preservers or restorers of health, always committed to the good of their patients is well known. The model of the Christian physician is a Hippocratic model, of one who seeks the sick so that he may bring relief to them and strengthen them. When illness occurs, Christianity affirms an ethical duty to struggle against sickness, which if unaddressed can lead to death. The moral requirement to care for the health of the body indicates it is appropriate to use healing methods that will enhance health and maintain life. The aim of this paper is to explore the dimensions of the concept of trust in the doctor-patient relationship, by starting from the Christian meaning of illness and of the role of the doctor. The paper presents a number of essential theoretical elements related to trust, as presented in the literature dealing with the doctor-patient relationship: the meaning of trust, its dimensions, its stages of development, its impact, its sources, the patient’s perspectives on trust, the importance of trust for healthcare systems. (shrink)

Background: Nurse-patient communication is a unique clinical skill in the healthcare professions that promotes good quality care and patient outcomes. This communication can be disrupted by many barriers that impact the therapeutic relationship and deliver of care. Purpose: The study aims to identify the barriers affecting nurse-patient communication at primary health centers in Almadina Munawara City, Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among 212 nurses and 214 patients utilizing a self-reporting questionnaire. A version of the (...) same file was then uploaded into NVivo, and data that were coded under all communication barriers including language discordance among patients and healthcare providers (e. g., subtheme: patient prefers a mother tongue speaking doctor), cultural-religious difference and environmental cues between the involved parties to determine their importance in this context as well (see Table 2). Results: The results showed that language, cultural and environmental differences had an extensive influence on how nurses communicated with patients. Key barriers included nurse shortages, limited communication time and low income. Our results suggest that these barriers differ in their effect with language barrier and habitat disturbance being the most important ones. Conclusions: This study concludes that nurse-patient communication is a complex multi-sectional process, constrained by numerous barriers. Strategic intervention aimed at addressing these barriers can strengthen nurse-patient interaction and accelerate patient care. Communication remains a cornerstone in all the best practices of delivering healthcare effectively and keeping patients happy. (shrink)

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the difficult task of balancing access to misinformation with respect for patient decision-making. Due to its innate antagonism, the paradigm of “physician paternalism” versus “patient autonomy” may not adequately capture the clinical relationship. The authors hypothesized that most patients would, in fact, prefer significant physician input as opposed to unopinionated information when making medical decisions. There is a lack of empirical data corroborating this in the United States. To that end, a survey was distributed to (...) 650 individuals through Amazon Mechanical Turk, of which 499 responses met pre-determined quality criteria. Most respondents believed their doctor's insight would be better than their own if injured or gravely ill. When asked to affirm preferences separately, a significantly higher proportion of respondents preferred guidance from their doctor when making medical decisions compared to being presented with unopinionated information ( p < 0.001). Encouragingly, 93.1% believed that the doctor's primary goal was their health. When asked directly to compare physician guidance to unopinionated information, 69.1% respondents stated they would prefer physician guidance. We found a consistent association between educational/economic background and affirmative responses ( p < 0.001), suggesting particular attention should be paid to patients that are disadvantaged with respect to these demographic factors. The belief in a shared goal, and a consistent preference for physician input, suggests that patients endorse a more collaborative view of the clinical dynamic than is suggested by the paternalism-autonomy paradigm. This pilot study suggests physicians should not be afraid to communicate conviction with regard to treatment decisions. (shrink)

Objective To study how doctors care for their patients, both medically and as fellow humans, through observing their conduct in patient–doctor encounters. Design Qualitative study in which 101 videotaped consultations were observed and analysed using a Grounded Theory approach, generating explanatory categories through a hermeneutical analysis of the taped consultations. Setting A 500-bed general teaching hospital in Norway. Participants 71 doctors working in clinical non-psychiatric departments and their patients. Results The doctors were concerned about their patients' health and how (...) their medical knowledge could be of service. This medical focus often over-rode other important aspects of the consultations, especially existential elements. The doctors actively directed the focus away from their patients' existential concerns onto medical facts and rarely addressed the personal aspects of a patient's condition, treating them in a biomechanical manner. At the same time, however, the doctors attended to their patients with courteousness, displaying a polite and friendly attitude and emphasising the relationship between them. Conclusions The study suggests that the main failing of patient–doctor encounters is not a lack of courteous manners, but the moral offence patients experience when existential concerns are ignored. Improving doctors' social and communication skills cannot resolve this moral problem, which appears to be intrinsically bound to modern medical practice. Acknowledging this moral offence would, however, be the first step towards minimising the effects thereof. (shrink)

In contemporary paternalism literature, persuasion is commonly not considered paternalistic. Moreover, paternalism is typically understood to be problematic either because it is seen as coercive, or because of the insult of the paternalist considering herself superior. In this paper, I argue that doctors who persuade patients act paternalistically. Specifically, I argue that trying to persuade a patient (here understood as aiming for the patient to consent to a certain treatment, although he prefers not to) should be differentiated from trying to (...) convince him (here understood as aiming for the patient to want the treatment) and recommending (the doctor merely providing her professional opinion). These three forms of influence are illustrated by summaries of video-recorded hospital encounters. While convincing and recommending are generally not paternalistic, I argue that persuasion is what I call communicative paternalism and that it is problematic for two reasons. First, the patient’s preferences are dismissed as unimportant. Second, the patient might wind up undergoing treatment against his preferences. This does not mean that persuasion always should be avoided, but it should not be undertaken lightly, and doctors should be aware of the fine line between non-paternalism and paternalism. The fact that my analysis of paternalism differs from traditional accounts does not imply that I deem these to be wrong, but rather that paternalism should be considered as a more multi-faceted concept than previous accounts allow for. (shrink)

From a psychological standpoint, communicating a severe diagnosis entails more than just naming a disease, it is a complex process with a number of stages: finding out what the patient already knows about the illness (some of which might be wrong, and thus psychologically detrimental), informing the patient while answering any questions (about the illness itself, the treatment, prognosis, recovery period, etc.) and last but not least, providing a minimum of psychological support depending on the patient’s reaction. Romanian law regarding (...) doctor-patient relationship and communication is modeled on the Anglo-Saxon model centered on patient autonomy and direct communication with the latter if the patient desires to know the truth about his condition. If this is not the case, the patient can name a proxy for doctor-patient communication. There are three legal documents that clarify these aspects: Law of Patient Rights, Medical Association’s Ethics Code and the Health Reform Law. The first two are conflicting on several aspects that we will discuss in this paper. The few studies on doctor-patient communication published in Romania reveal that there is no unitary methodology in this field. The doctors attest that often times the patient’s family, when faced with severe illness turn to the traditional model of communication, i.e. they desire to know the severe diagnosis first and pressure the physician to hide the truth form the patient, contrary to the letter of the law. The aim of this paper is to discuss the issue of communicating severe diagnosis in nowadays Romania in a very complex context: 1. The model of doctor-patient relationship and communication has changed after communist era (from paternalistic to partenerial); 2. Conflicting and missing issues in laws; 3. Laws based on patient’s autonomy principle in a traditional society based on another model of taking care (the patient is part of a family nucleus and the family wants to interfere into the medical communication process). Communication has only recently entered the curriculum of some medical schools in Romania. The doctors questioned as part of a study reveal that they‘ve learned to communicate a severe diagnosis by trial and error. This being said we recommend the inception of practical doctor-patient communication courses that could lead to improving doctor-patient relationships, communication of the diagnosis being their foundations. (shrink)

Cooperation between doctors of various specialties and other medical specialists is the standard of care in the treatment of patients. Due to the variety of diseases and the dynamic development of medicine in general, it is difficult to be an expert in every field and know all the recommended treatments. An example of such cooperation is the joint treatment of patients with the problem of ingrown toenails. The article contains an analysis of patients who received treatment in a doctor’s office (...) in cooperation with podiatrists. A conservative approach towards the treatment of this condition sees the patient being initially diagnosed and treated by a podiatrist and then later, if necessary, being referred to a doctor for surgical treatment. The exchange of experiences and information on patients treated by interdisciplinary teams allows doctors and podiatrists to find the best possible treatment and improve the quality of life of patients. The follow-up of patients after surgery can be performed later in podiatry offices. Owing to modern electronic communication, it is possible for a doctor to constantly monitor the patient’s condition without the need for direct visits to the doctor’s office. (shrink)

Every person in the course of his or her life has some contact with the medical profession. And in recent years that profession has been revolutionised in the fields of research, of technology and of practice. Hardly has one advance been declared than it is superseded by another. At the same time, while community attitudes themselves change, group practices have taken some weight from doctors but perhaps have diminished the doctor/ patient relationship of previous years. Another change in the oversight (...) of the medical profession has been the growth of what is called medical ethics. What, for example, is the amount of information a doctor should give a patient prior to performing an experimental procedure? Amongst all these changes there are still fundamental issues where doctors have to use their personal judgment as to what to do or what to say. For Max Griffiths this is where ethical considerations become matters of medical morality. He outlines a broad range of situations which frequently confront both doctor and patient, requiring sympathetic understanding on each side. Some of these arise out of the radical changes which have occurred in community attitudes and practices. Abortion and euthanasia are two important examples. Others range from growing pains and teenage trauma to ageing and dealing with dying and with loss. From his extensive associations with patients in a wide variety of situations the author tackles those issues which demonstrate what makes a good doctor. The result is a book that is for doctors and patients alike. Max Griffiths' involvement in medical matters range from responsibility for outback hospitals in places like Birdsville, Oodnadatta, Halls Creek and Fitzroy Crossing to long term membership of the board of the Austin Hospital in Melbourne. In this latter capacity he chaired committees responsible for the oversight of medical research, especially the protection of patients' rights. He was also involved in similar committees at the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne and the Royal Darwin Hospital. As a long term minister of religion his visits to his parishioners both at home and in hospitals gave him a deep insight into their anxieties. He was also a foundation member of Ronald McDonald House and chairman of several institutions engaged in the care of children with disabilities. [Subject: Sociology, Health Care, Medical Ethics]. (shrink)

Doctor-patient interaction has gained increasing attention among sociologists and linguists during the last few decades. The problem with the studies performed so far, however, has been a lack of a theoretical framework which could bring together the various phenomena observed within medical consultations. Mikhail Bakhtin's philosophy of language offers us tools for studying medical practice as socio-cultural semiotic phenomenon. Applying Bakhtin's ideas of polyphonic, context-dependent and open-ended nature of human communication opens the possibilities to develop prevailing theoretical and empirical (...) approaches to the study of medical consultations. (shrink)

Health care decision making has changed profoundly during the past several decades. Advances in scientific knowledge, technology, and professional skill enable medical providers to extend and enhance life by increasing the ability to cure disease, manage disability, and palliate suffering. Ironically, the same interventions can prolong painful existence and protract the dying process. Recognizing that medical interventions, especially lifesustaining measures, are not always medically appropriate or even desired by a patient or family, health care professionals endeavor to determine who should (...) make health care decisions and according to what standards. The importance that Western culture places on individual rights and self-determination is reflected in the growing advocacy for patient autonomy and the discrediting of physician paternalism. However, the question of autonomy becomes more complex when patients lack the capacity to decide for themselves.Advance directives represent one response to the dilemma of decision making for incapacitated patients. The original advance directive, the living will, is a written list of instructions reflecting the individual's wishes about care, usually at the end of life. (shrink)

The research literature suggests that physicians’ attitudes regarding disclosing a diagnosis of cancer have changed, from nondisclosure to full disclosure. Physicians’ attitudes towards disclosing a patient’s prognosis are likewise said to have changed, although not to the same degree.The aim of this study was to identify inherent challenges in communicating information about imminent death. It included one set of interviews with patients and another set with doctors, and subsequent discussions of ways to overcome obstacles to patients’ understanding their situation. Patients (...) were diagnosed with leukemia, myeloma, or lung cancer; the doctors were hematologists and lung oncologists. The two sets of interviews were analyzed separately using a content analysis model developed by Graneheim and Lundman. For each set of interviews, eight content areas were defined as belonging to an area of interest and scrutinized for the information they included regarding communicating prognoses to patients.The main finding was a discrepancy between patients’ desire to be fully informed regarding their prognosis and physicians’ reluctance to offer a prognosis until a patient had overt signs of approaching death. We conclude that existing guidelines for disclosure of bad news should be modified to encourage disclosure and discussion of uncertain prognostic information, unless a patient is clearly opposed to receiving such information or otherwise not a suitable partner for dialogue. (shrink)

The scarcity of resources during the COVID‐19 pandemic caused ethical dilemmas in prioritizing patients for treatment. Medical and ethical guidance only emphasizes clinical procedures but does not consider the sociocultural aspect. This study explored the perception of former COVID‐19 patients and their families on the decision‐making process of the patient's selection at a time of scarcity of resources. The result will inform the development of an ethical guide for allocating scarce resources that aligns with Indonesian culture. We conducted qualitative research (...) with in‐depth interviews between May ‐ December 2022 involving sixteen participants from various cities in Indonesia. We transcribed the interviews and analyzed the results using thematic analysis. This study found that doctor's decisions often differed from patient's expectations in allocating scarce resources, and therefore, it should be communicated appropriately. Medical decisions were not sufficiently made ethically, but must also be made communicatively. In Indonesia's strong communal culture, community involvement was essential to distributing limited resources. A better approach to ethical education, including adequate communication skills, is necessary to prepare health professionals for facing unpredictable future pandemics. (shrink)

Futile medical interventions have virtually no chance of success. Doctors might perform such procedures because of pressure from families or patients. The doctor might also have an ulterior motive of gain or prefer to do it rather than take time to communicate with the patient about a poor prognosis. Established ways to communicate bad news to patients are not always used by managing physicians with time constraints. The SPIKES protocol method is outlined to assist in sensitive communication where further (...) intervention is futile. This review primarily explores various aspects of medical futility. It also explores strategies for effectively communicating with patients and their families regarding futility interventions. A side-effect of futile interventions is burnout in doctors and other health practitioners (HPs). The complex relationship between futility and burnout is described. (shrink)

Hilary Putnam’s influential analysis of the ‘division of linguistic labour’ has a striking application in the area of doctor–patient interaction: patients typically think of themselves as consumers of technical medical terms in the sense that they normally defer to health professionals’ explanations of meaning. It is at the same time well documented that patients tend to think they are entitled to understand lay health terms like ‘sickness’ and ‘illness’ in ways that do not necessarily correspond to health professionals’ understanding. Drawing (...) on recent philosophical theories of concept possession, the article argues that this disparity between medical and lay vocabulary implies that it is, in an important range of cases, easier for doctors to create a communicative platform of shared concepts by using and explaining special medical expressions than by using common lay expressions. This conclusion is contrasted with the view that doctors and patients typically understand each other when they use lay vocabulary. Obviously, use of expressions like ‘sickness’ or ‘illness’ does not necessarily lead to poor communication, but it is important that doctors have an awareness of how patients interpret such terms. (shrink)

BackgroundCaregivers may play a fundamental role in the clinical pathway of cancer patients. They provide emotional, informational, and functional support as well as practical assistance, and they might help mediate the interaction and communication with the oncologists when care options are discussed, or decisions are made. Little is known about the impact of dyadic dynamics on patient-doctor communication, patient's satisfaction, or adherence to the therapies. This study protocol aims to evaluate the efficacy of a psychological support intervention on (...) patients-caregivers relationship and their alignment in the treatment decision-making process and estimate related improvement in patient' compliance/adherence to treatments.MethodsA total of 102 patients-caregivers' dyads will be involved, among breast and prostate cancer patients. The study entails a pre- post- evaluation through psychological questionnaires, with a randomization of participants in two conditions, the experimental one in which subjects participate in a psychological support consultation, and the control one, where dyads do not receive any intervention. A follow up after 6 months from the enrollment is planned.DiscussionA positive impact of the psychological support intervention on patients' anxiety, depression, distress, and perceived social support is expected. Such improvements can directly affect patients' satisfaction and adherence to treatments. Data gathered from this study may inform health care providers, policy makers, and public health managers about the importance of caregiver's involvement in the cancer care pathway, and the best way to manage it. A further impact is to develop a specific intervention protocol to support caregivers' involvement in cancer care pathway, improve patient's wellbeing, the interaction with physicians and the compliance with the cancer treatment. (shrink)

The article focuses on talk and cognition in terms of action. It outlines methodological alternatives for approaches addressing meaning construction and the accounts people give of their actions. There are studies, rooted especially in phenomenology and ethnomethodology, that manifest the idea of intersubjective reality seen as achievements of situated actions. In this framework, conversation and communication are seen per se as significant forms of social action. Instead of intersubjective reality, often brought about with an inductive research method, the article (...) argues for instrumental reality as the context for understanding talk and cognition in terms of action. The aim is a method that studies multivoicedness of activity in terms of situated actions. The method integrates situational features in dialogue with the cultural-historical processes of meaning construction. It is based on the theoretical notion of activity as a system that emerges and changes in time and place through internal contradictions. In the context of instrumentality, dialogical processes are also considered historically emerging and internally conflicting processes of rationality. I discuss this method with data on conversations between a patient and a doctor at a primary health care consultation. The study considers medical knowledge less as a substance than as a historically produced perspective through which the rationality of problem solving is accomplished by doctor and patient. The study aims to break away from the epistemological dualism of conflicting domains of meaning: the one of medicine that is objective and the one of experience that is subjective. The context of instrumentality includes a working hypothesis of a zone of proximal development of the doctor-patient relationship. (shrink)

Microethics is about the ethics of everyday clinical practice. The subtle nuances in communication between doctor and patient (the doctor’s choice of words, tone, body language, gestures, etc.) can influence the exercise of the patient’s autonomy. The four models of the doctor- patient/physician-patient relationship (paternalistic, informative, interpretive, deliberative) weigh respect for autonomy and beneficence in varying proportions. Each model may be appropriate in certain circumstances. This article considers these models from the perspective of microethics and the unique dimensions created (...) by the doctor-child-parent relationship. In particular, the article considers the nuances to the autonomy principle created by the child’s developing maturity and the parent’s role as a co-fiduciary of the child’s interests. Ultimately, the deliberative model seems most appropriate to the paediatric setting, since it accommodates the child’s developing maturity in making healthcare-related decisions. This model infuses care into the doctor’s communication with the child and parent. (shrink)

Due to improvements in medicine, the figures of patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) are increasing. Diagnostics of DoC and prognostication of rehabilitation outcome is challenging but necessary to evaluate recovery potential and to decide on treatment options. Such decisions should be made by doctors and patients’ surrogates based on medico-ethical principles. Meeting information needs and communicating effectively with caregivers as the patients´ most common surrogate-decision makers is crucial, and challenging when novel tech-nologies are introduced. This qualitative study aims to (...) explore information needs of informal DoC caregivers, how they manage the obtained information and their perceptions and experiences with caregiver-physician communication in facilities that implemented innovative neurodiagnostics studies. In 2021, we conducted semi-structured interviews with nine caregivers of clinically stable DoC patients in two rehabilitation centers in Italy and Germany. Participants were selected based on consecutive purposeful sampling. Caregivers were recruited at the facilities after written informed consent. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated. For analysis, we used reflexive thematic analysis according to Braun & Clarke (2006). Caregivers experienced the conversations emotionally, generally based on the value of the information provided. They reported to seek positive information, comfort and empathy with-in the communication of results of examinations. They needed detailed information to gain a deep understanding and a clear picture of their loved-one’s condition. The results suggest a mismatch between the perspectives of caregivers and the perspectives of medical profession-als, and stress the need for more elaborate approaches to the communication of results of neu-rodiagnostics studies. (shrink)

Many health care decisions depend not only upon medical facts, but also on value judgments—patient goals and preferences. Until recent decades, patients relied on doctors to tell them what to do. Then ethicists and others convinced clinicians to adopt a paradigm shift in medical practice, to recognize patient autonomy, by orienting decision making toward the unique goals of individual patients. Unfortunately, current medical practice often falls short of empowering patients. In this article, we reflect on whether the current state of (...) medical decision making effectively promotes patients' health care goals. We base our reflections, in part, on research in which we observed physicians making earnest efforts to partner with patients in making treatment decisions, but still struggling to empower patients—failing to communicate clearly to patients about decision-relevant information, overwhelming patients with irrelevant information, overlooking when patients' emotions made it hard to engage in choices, and making recommendations before discussing patients' goals. (shrink)