better health by designLearn More

What did you think about on the way to work?

What did you think about as you made your way to work? Were you already at work in your head? Ruminating on the past? Worrying about the future? Did you grumble to yourself about the commute? The unreliable public transport? The traffic jam? The ‘idiot’ who cut you off at the junction? Did you read the ‘fake news’? Did you look at Instagram posts or catch up on Facebook? Were you one of those people yelling into your phone on the bus or tram?

Immediately following their regular commute to work, participants completed questionnaires regarding state driver stress and anger during that commute. Then, immediately following completion of that work day, they completed a state version of the Workplace Aggression Scale. As state driver stress increased, the frequency of both expressed hostility and obstructionism increased (independently) during that work day, but only among male employees. In contrast, overt aggression during that work day was greatest among males who were higher in physical aggressiveness as a general trait characteristic. The present study highlights the interactive nature of traffic and workplace environments, in that negative experiences in the traffic environment may spill over for some individuals to influence non driving events

Journal of Applied Social Psychology Dwight A. Hennessy

Picture by gato-gato-gato

Did this person need those pills?

No matter what business you are in you might ask yourself if whatever you just sold to your customer is what they really needed. If you are a doctor that question cuts deeper- did you really identify  that person’s problem or did your prescription just get them out the door?

Inappropriate prescriptions are known to pose health risks for older adults, leading to unnecessary hospitalisations and undue cost. Budnitz et al

Picture by Brent Matthew Lillard

How do you explain?

In any meeting where you are the expert how do you explain technical details? As a doctor how do you explain viral illness? Warts? Heart disease? Cancer? How do you know the other person ‘gets it’? Do you say the same thing every time? Do you use pictures? Sounds? Have you practiced the script as much as you practice other aspects of your art? Why or why not?

Andrew McDonald wrote in the BMJ:

The development of such a language, securely founded in shared meanings, would be a good first step towards better communication between professionals and patients. It would not, of course, deliver the goal of full participation in decision making, but that goal will remain elusive unless we begin by understanding one another.

Picture by Marco Verch

How do you end your meetings?

We know how to start a meeting- we stand up, shake hands, say hello, smile. But what’s the best way to end a meeting? It matters for one reason:

The peak–end rule is a psychological heuristic in which people judge an experience largely based on how they felt at its peak (i.e., its most intense point) and at its end, rather than based on the total sum or average of every moment of the experience. The effect occurs regardless of whether the experience is pleasant or unpleasant. Wikipedia

If you are a doctor this is all the more important because people generally don’t seek a meeting with you because all is well. They may be experiencing all sorts of unpleasant feelings. So how do you end that meeting? How do you know it’s working?

Picture by Peter Lee

Why don’t people take medical advice?

Significant proportions of people walk out of doctors’ clinics and disregard or fail to act on the opinion offered.  What practitioners can do to help is to review their communication style. As Bungay Stanier has suggested it can’t be assumed that the first thing the person mentions is what is bothering them the most. Bungay Stanier’s suggested questions will reduce the rush to action. A rush that fails to identify the issue that the patient may feel is a greater priority than hypertension or diabetes.

I summarise the issue in this video:

 

Picture by Sergio Patino

What is said to people when drugs are prescribed for life?

Every day doctors suggest that one or other of their patients have to take medication for life. Hypertension, diabetes and certain deficiencies are among the many conditions that may benefit from taking medication longterm. On the other hand, many people reject this advice or take the prescribed drugs only sometimes. Ultimately the decision to accept treatment is for the person with the condition to decide. How can the advice be tailored so that the person is making an informed decision?

BACKGROUND: ‘Concordance’ has been proposed as a new approach towards sub-optimal medication use; however, it is not clear how this may be achieved in practice. AIM: To develop a strategy for understanding sub-optimal medication use and seek concordance during primary care consultations. DESIGN: A developmental qualitative study using a modified action research design. SETTING: Three Scottish general practices. METHOD: Patients using treatment sub-optimally and having poor clinical control were offered extended consultations to explore their situation. Their authority to make treatment decisions was made explicit throughout. Clinicians refined a consultation model during ten ‘Balint-style’ meetings that ran in parallel with the analysis. The analysis included all material from the consultations, meetings, and discussion with patients after the intervention. RESULTS: Three practitioners recorded 59 consultations with 24 adult patients. A six-stage process was developed, first to understand and then to discuss existing medication use. Understanding of medication use was best established using a structured exploration of patients’ beliefs about their illness and medication. Four problematic issues were identified: understanding, acceptance, level of personal control, and motivation. Pragmatic interventions were developed that were tailored to the issues identified. Of the 22 subjects usefully engaged in the process, 14 had improved clinical control or medication use three months after intervention ceased. CONCLUSIONS: A sensitive, structured exploration of patients’ beliefs can elucidate useful insights that explain medication use and expose barriers to change. Identifying and discussing these barriers improved management for some. A model to assist such concordant prescribing is presented. Dowell et al BJGP

I summarise the issue in this video:

https://youtu.be/xFQ2kVOMS64

Picture by Victor

It’s not the infrastructure it’s you that makes the difference.

CONTEXT:
Communication education has become integral to pre- and post-qualification clinical curricula, but it is not informed by research into how practitioners think that good communication arises.
OBJECTIVES:
This study was conducted to explore how surgeons conceptualise their communication with patients with breast cancer in order to inform the design and delivery of communication curricula.
METHODS:
We carried out 19 interviews with eight breast surgeons. Each interview centred on a specific consultation with a different patient. We analysed the transcripts of the surgeons’ interviews qualitatively using a constant comparative approach.
RESULTS:
All of the surgeons described communication as central to their role. Communication could be learned to some extent, not from formal training, but by selectively incorporating practices they observed in other practitioners and by being mindful in consultations. Surgeons explained that their own values and character shaped how they communicated and what they wanted to achieve, and constrained what could be learned.
CONCLUSIONS:
These surgeons’ understanding of communication is consistent with recent suggestions that communication education: (i) should place practitioners’ goals at its centre, and (ii) might be enhanced by approaches that support ‘mindful’ practice. By contrast, surgeons’ understanding diverged markedly from the current emphasis on ‘communication skills’. Research that explores practitioners’ perspectives might help educators to design communication curricula that engage practitioners by seeking to enhance their own ways of learning about communication.

Mendick et al

Picture by ReSurge International

The most valuable lesson learned on my first day as a doctor

Picture by JD Lasica

Improve patient experience to deliver better results

Joe and Brenda are now in their 60s they have a number of chronic healthcare problems some of which will put them at risk of life limiting pathology (hypertension) and others detract from their quality of life (low back pain). Everyone involved in providing healthcare to this couple wants the best for them. Best case scenario Joe and Brenda are satisfied every time they consult their doctor and improve from whatever ails them.  It is also better if their use of the healthcare resources is minimised. But what predicts that outcome?

In 2001 the BMJ considered the issues. Paul Little and his colleagues approached three local practices that served 24 100 patients. They invited consecutive patients attending the surgery to participate. All patients able to complete the questionnaire were eligible. 661 participants completed a questionnaire before their consultation in which they were asked to agree or disagree with statements about what they wanted the doctor to do. A questionnaire after the consultation asked patients about their perception of the doctor’s approach. Both questionnaires were based on the five main domains of the patient centred model: exploring the disease and illness experience, understanding the whole person, finding common ground, health promotion, and enhancing the doctor-patient relationship

The post-consultation questionnaire included items about the reason for consultation and a positive and definite approach of the doctor to diagnosis and prognosis as well as sociodemographic details, the short state anxiety questionnaire, number of medical problems, and current treatment. The team also included questions relating to important patient related outcomes from the consultation: enablement (six questions about being enabled to cope with the problem and with life), satisfaction (medical interview satisfaction scale), and symptom burden (measure yourself medical outcome profile, which measures the severity of symptoms, feeling unwell, and daily restriction of activity). Patients were followed up after one month with the measure yourself medical outcome profile, and the team reviewed the medical records after two months for reattendance, investigation, and referral.The outcome measures of interest were patients’ enablement, satisfaction, and burden of symptoms. Factor analysis identified five components:

  1. Communication and partnership (a sympathetic doctor interested in patients’ worries and expectations and who discusses and agrees the problem and treatment);
  2. Personal relationship (a doctor who knows the patient and their emotional needs);
  3. Health promotion;
  4. Positive approach (being definite about the problem and when it would settle); and
  5. Interest in effect on patient’s life.
  • Satisfaction was related to communication and partnership and a positive approach.atisfaction was reduced if expectations were not met for communication and partnership, a positive approach, and an examination but were not affected by expectations of a prescription.
  • Enablement was greater with interest in the effect on life, health promotion, and a positive approach. Enablement was also less if expectations were not met for an examination, health promotion, and a positive approach.
  • A positive approach was also associated with reduced symptom burden at one month. Symptom burden at one month was worse if expectations of a positive approach were not met.
  • Referrals were fewer if patients felt they had a personal relationship with their doctor.If expectations of a personal relationship were not met, referrals were more likely.

From these data and similar results published before and since we can conclude that Joe and Brenda expect the following:

  1. To have their perspective considered by someone who clearly cares
  2. To be examined
  3. To have the impact of the illness on their lives taken into consideration
  4. To be advised when they are likely to feel better and
  5. To receive advice on how to avoid problems in the future

In return they will use healthcare resources less and their symptom burden will reduce. All this might be achieved without major policy reform and can be implemented locally to improve the patient experience and by corollary reduce the strain on healthcare resources.

Picture by Jenny Mealing

Is your motto reflected in every interaction?

Every interaction with patients should reflect the motto of the healthcare organization serving their needs.

Motto: A sentence, phrase, or word expressing the spirit or purpose of a person, organization, city, etc., and often inscribed on a badge, banner, etc. Dictionary

I like the motto of the Royal College of General Practitioners, UK:

Cum Scientia Caritas

Compassion with knowledge. So here are a list of unacceptable explanations when someone interacts with a service provider and things deviate from whatever noble aim is adorned above the front door:

  1. I’m not paid to do that
  2. I don’t have the resources
  3. That’s not how things are done
  4. Where’s the evidence?
  5. It’s not my fault
  6. It’s not in the protocol
  7. Too idealistic
  8. It’s not me it’s them
  9. I didn’t know
  10. We didn’t negotiate that in the contract
  11. People expect too much
  12. We never promised that
  13. We might do that in the future
  14. We would never get through the day if we did that for everyone
  15. I don’t care
  16. I only work here
  17. Too busy
  18. Maybe next time
  19. What about me?
  20. It doesn’t matter

Every interaction should reflect what we say and what we believe the patient /customer/ colleague is entitled to from our service or our staff. The response when deviations are reported should also reflect the motto. Choose your motto with care.

Picture by Adrian Clark