Investigator/IRB-led community communication in genetic research: A descriptive feasibility pilot study

This pilot study, conducted in the Houston, TX, area, established a structured dialogue among a university Institutional Review Board, its researchers, and its local community members (i.e. pool of potential research participants) for the purpose of further educating all three parties about genetic research and community concerns related to such research. An IRB-designed educational presentation aimed at assisting potential subjects in making an informed decision to participate in genetic research was provided to four community groups (n=54); this presentation also included a current example of genetic research being conducted in the community as explained by the researcher, and a question-and-answer session designed to assist the IRB and the researcher in understanding the community's concerns about genetic research. Comparisons of pre- and post- presentation community questionnaires indicate that the joint presentation was effective in increasing community knowledge about genetic research, most notably related to the risks and benefits of this research to the individual, as well as the understanding that protections are in place for research participants. While researchers are optimistic about the idea of a collaborative effort with the IRB and the community, the feasibility of such a program and the benefit to the participating researchers remain unclear; additional research is necessary to establish the most effective method of communication for all groups involved, as well as to obtain statistically significant results with regard to race/ethnicity, gender, and education levels of community participants. ^

CHARACTERIZING, ASSESSING AND IMPROVING HEALTHCARE REFERRAL COMMUNICATION

Similar to other health care processes, referrals are susceptible to breakdowns. These breakdowns in the referral process can lead to poor continuity of care, slow diagnostic processes, delays and repetition of tests, patient and provider dissatisfaction, and can lead to a loss of confidence in providers. These facts and the necessity for a deeper understanding of referrals in healthcare served as the motivation to conduct a comprehensive study of referrals. The research began with the real problem and need to understand referral communication as a mean to improve patient care. Despite previous efforts to explain referrals and the dynamics and interrelations of the variables that influence referrals there is not a common, contemporary, and accepted definition of what a referral is in the health care context. The research agenda was guided by the need to explore referrals as an abstract concept by: 1) developing a conceptual definition of referrals, and 2) developing a model of referrals, to finally propose a 3) comprehensive research framework. This dissertation has resulted in a standard conceptual definition of referrals and a model of referrals. In addition a mixed-method framework to evaluate referrals was proposed, and finally a data driven model was developed to predict whether a referral would be approved or denied by a specialty service. The three manuscripts included in this dissertation present the basis for studying and assessing referrals using a common framework that should allow an easier comparative research agenda to improve referrals taking into account the context where referrals occur.

Evaluation of therapist and client language in Motivational Interviewing (MI) sessions: A secondary analysis of data from the Southern Methodist Alcohol Research Trial (SMART) study

In the United States, “binge” drinking among college students is an emerging public health concern due to the significant physical and psychological effects on young adults. The focus is on identifying interventions that can help decrease high-risk drinking behavior among this group of drinkers. One such intervention is Motivational interviewing (MI), a client-centered therapy that aims at resolving client ambivalence by developing discrepancy and engaging the client in change talk. Of late, there is a growing interest in determining the active ingredients that influence the alliance between the therapist and the client. This study is a secondary analysis of the data obtained from the Southern Methodist Alcohol Research Trial (SMART) project, a dismantling trial of MI and feedback among heavy drinking college students. The present project examines the relationship between therapist and client language in MI sessions on a sample of “binge” drinking college students. Of the 126 SMART tapes, 30 tapes (‘MI with feedback’ group = 15, ‘MI only’ group = 15) were randomly selected for this study. MISC 2.1, a mutually exclusive and exhaustive coding system, was used to code the audio/videotaped MI sessions. Therapist and client language were analyzed for communication characteristics. Overall, therapists adopted a MI consistent style and clients were found to engage in change talk. Counselor acceptance, empathy, spirit, and complex reflections were all significantly related to client change talk (p-values ranged from 0.001 to 0.047). Additionally, therapist ‘advice without permission’ and MI Inconsistent therapist behaviors were strongly correlated with client sustain talk (p-values ranged from 0.006 to 0.048). Simple linear regression models showed a significant correlation between MI consistent (MICO) therapist language (independent variable) and change talk (dependent variable) and MI inconsistent (MIIN) therapist language (independent variable) and sustain talk (dependent variable). The study has several limitations such as small sample size, self-selection bias, poor inter-rater reliability for the global scales and the lack of a temporal measure of therapist and client language. Future studies might consider a larger sample size to obtain more statistical power. In addition the correlation between therapist language, client language and drinking outcome needs to be explored.^

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.^

Planning and implementation efficacy as a determinant of health risk communication outcomes: Case studies of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS)

This study was conducted under the auspices of the Subcommittee on Risk Communication and Education of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP) to determine how Public Health Service (PHS) agencies are communicating information about health risk, what factors contributed to effective communication efforts, and what specific principles, strategies, and practices best promote more effective health risk communication outcomes.^ Member agencies of the Subcommittee submitted examples of health risk communication activities or decisions they perceived to be effective and some examples of cases they thought had not been as effective as desired. Of the 10 case studies received, 7 were submitted as examples of effective health risk communication, and 3, as examples of less effective communication.^ Information contained in the 10 case studies describing the respective agencies' health risk communication strategies and practices was compared with EPA's Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication, since similar rules were not found in any PHS agency. EPA's rules are: (1) Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner. (2) Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts. (3) Listen to the public's specific concerns. (4) Be honest, frank, and open. (5) Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources. (6) Meet the needs of the media. (7) Speak clearly and with compassion.^ On the basis of case studies analysis, the Subcommittee, in their attempts to design and implement effective health risk communication campaigns, identified a number of areas for improvement among the agencies. First, PHS agencies should consider developing a focus specific to health risk communication (i.e., office or specialty resource). Second, create a set of generally accepted practices and guidelines for effective implementation and evaluation of PHS health risk communication activities and products. Third, organize interagency initiatives aimed at increasing awareness and visibility of health risk communication issues and trends within and between PHS agencies.^ PHS agencies identified some specific implementation strategies the CCEHRP might consider pursuing to address the major recommendations. Implementation strategies common to PHS agencies emerged in the following five areas: (1) program development, (2) building partnerships, (3) developing training, (4) expanding information technologies, and (5) conducting research and evaluation. ^