Doctor-patient communication in the medical interaction: Context, implications, and practice

Effective communication; whether from an interpersonal, mass media, or global perspective, is a critical component in public health. It is an essential conduit in increasing public awareness of available health resources, potential health hazards and related disease prevention strategies, and in delivering better health care. Within this context, available literature asserts doctor-patient communication as central to healthcare delivery. It has been shown to affect patient health outcomes, satisfaction with care, adherence to treatment recommendations, and even understanding of medical information. While research supports the essential imperative of interventions aimed at teaching doctors and patients the communication skills necessary for a successful and meaningful medical interaction, most interventions to date, focus on teaching these communication skills to doctors and seem to rely, largely, on mass media for providing patients with the information needed to increase communication efficacy. This study sought to fill a significant gap in the doctor-patient communication literature by reviewing the context of the doctor-patient exchange in the medical interaction, the implications of this exchange in resulting care of the patient, and the potential improvements to practice through interventions aimed at improving the communication exchange. Closing with an evaluation of a patient-centered communication intervention, the “How to Talk to Your Doctor” (HTTTYD) program that combines previously identified optimal strategies for improving communication between doctors and patients, this study examined the patients’ perspective of their potential as better communicators in the medical interaction. ^ Specific Aims, Hypotheses or Questions (Aim I) To examine the context of health communication within a public health framework and its relation to health care delivery. (Aim II) To review doctor-patient communication as a central focus within health care delivery and the resulting implications to patient care. (Aim III) To assess the utility of interventions to improve doctor-patient communication. Specifically, to evaluate the effectiveness of a patient-centered community education intervention, the “How to Talk to Your Doctor” (HTTTYD) program, aimed at improving patient communication efficacy.^

The Family Preservation Philosophy and Therapy With Lesbian Clients

Family preservation is generally viewed in terms of a rather narrow practice definition. However, it's underlying philosophy offers a strong framework for building a positive, nonbiased helping alliance with lesbian clients in a therapeutic setting. The family preservation philosophy offers a unique heuristic for helping professionals to work with lesbians. Family preservation values teach that the therapist must start with the client's reality, recognize the particular needs of that client, and use the client's strengths in treatment. Also inherent in this perspective is respect and sensitivity to the lesbian client's "cultural context, experience, and history" (Family Preservation Institute, 1995). In other words, in the family preservation philosophy there is no assumption of heterosexuality in the therapeutic relationship; rather there is an assumption of unconditional positive regard. Further, clients are engaged in a dialogue and encouraged to name the challenges they encounter in their own words, from their own perspective. All of these principles will help empower lesbian clients. Lesbians may avoid traditional mental health services in times of need, preferring to depend on alternative services or friendship support networks. The choice not to seek help through mainstream agencies may be based on previous negative experience or on an assumption of the homophobic attitudes which are often inherent in such services. Traditional services are usually based on the medical model. Services based on the family preservation philosophy, however, have the capability of creating therapeutic relationships in which there is no assumption of heterosexuality, where the lesbian client is respected and viewed as a whole, healthy individual.

Impact of real time polymerase chain reaction technology on the therapeutic approach to treatment of staphylococcal infections

Can the early identification of the species of staphylococcus responsible for infection by the use of Real Time PCR technology influence the approach to the treatment of these infections? ^ This study was a retrospective cohort study in which two groups of patients were compared. The first group, ‘Physician Aware’ consisted of patients in whom physicians were informed of specific staphylococcal species and antibiotic sensitivity (using RT-PCR) at the time of notification of the gram stain. The second group, ‘Physician Unaware’ consisted of patients in whom treating physicians received the same information 24–72 hours later as a result of blood culture and antibiotic sensitivity determination. ^ The approach to treatment was compared between ‘Physician Aware’ and ‘Physician Unaware’ groups for three different microbiological diagnoses—namely MRSA, MSSA and no-SA (or coagulase negative Staphylococcus). ^ For a diagnosis of MRSA, the mean time interval to the initiation of Vancomycin therapy was 1.08 hours in the ‘Physician Aware’ group as compared to 5.84 hours in the ‘Physician Unaware’ group (p=0.34). ^ For a diagnosis of MSSA, the mean time interval to the initiation of specific anti-MSSA therapy with Nafcillin was 5.18 hours in the ‘Physician Aware’ group as compared to 49.8 hours in the ‘Physician Unaware’ group (p=0.007). Also, for the same diagnosis, the mean duration of empiric therapy in the ‘Physician Aware’ group was 19.68 hours as compared to 80.75 hours in the ‘Physician Unaware’ group (p=0.003) ^ For a diagnosis of no-SA or coagulase negative staphylococcus, the mean duration of empiric therapy was 35.65 hours in the ‘Physician Aware’ group as compared to 44.38 hours in the ‘Physician Unaware’ group (p=0.07). However, when treatment was considered a categorical variable and after exclusion of all cases where anti-MRS therapy was used for unrelated conditions, only 20 of 72 cases in the ‘Physician Aware’ group received treatment as compared to 48 of 106 cases in the ‘Physician Unaware’ group. ^ Conclusions. Earlier diagnosis of MRSA may not alter final treatment outcomes. However, earlier identification may lead to the earlier institution of measures to limit the spread of infection. The early diagnosis of MSSA infection, does lead to treatment with specific antibiotic therapy at an earlier stage of treatment. Also, the duration of empiric therapy is greatly reduced by early diagnosis. The early diagnosis of coagulase negative staphylococcal infection leads to a lower rate of unnecessary treatment for these infections as they are commonly considered contaminants. ^