Patient–clinician interactions in shared diabetes/nephrology consultations – A qualitative observation study
Background The incidence of chronic disease is increasing worldwide which, in turn, increases the demand for healthcare services. To meet these demands, healthcare systems are adapting their services in order to reduce treatment costs and ensure coherence for patients with multiple diseases. One for...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Scandinavian journal of caring sciences Vol. 38; no. 4; pp. 984 - 995 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sweden
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01-12-2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background
The incidence of chronic disease is increasing worldwide which, in turn, increases the demand for healthcare services. To meet these demands, healthcare systems are adapting their services in order to reduce treatment costs and ensure coherence for patients with multiple diseases. One form of adaptation is shared outpatient consultations between internal medical specialties. However, little is known about how patients interact with multiple clinicians in shared consultations.
Aim
This project aimed to explore how patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease interact with multiple clinicians in a shared outpatient setting.
Research Methods
We performed a qualitative ethnographic study, combining focused participant observations with informal field interviews. We included 17 participants, nine males and eight females with a mean age of 67.3 in the project. The data analysis was guided by Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis and Arthur Kleinman's theory of illness and disease.
Results
We found one over‐arching theme: ‘A consultation which encompassed both illness and disease’ and four subthemes: (1) ‘The medical focal point’ pertained to the focus on physiological measurements in dialogue between patients and clinicians. (2) ‘The possibility of negotiations’ illustrated how decisions about dialysis and pharmacological treatment were based on negotiations. (3) ‘Speaking different languages’ displayed how patients used alternative illness‐based explanations whereas clinicians tended to use biomedical language. (4) ‘Perceptions of everyday life’ concerned what patients considered was best for them when managing their illness and everyday lives.
Conclusion
Patients present information on how they balance life with physiological and psychosocial challenges. When clinicians employ a biomedical perspective, opportunities to gain information on patients' illness behaviours or cues to negotiate are missed. Patients prioritise functioning on a daily level over following treatment regimes. These findings are tenuous and require verification in similar studies in similar settings.
Short Phrases
Shared Outpatient Clinic, Patient–clinician interactions. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
| ISSN: | 0283-9318 1471-6712 1471-6712 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/scs.13299 |