General practice registrar responses to the use of different risk communication tools in simulated consultations: a focus group study
- 18 September 1999
- Vol. 319 (7212), 749-752
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7212.749
Abstract
Objectives: To pilot the use of a range of complementary risk communication tools in simulated general practice consultations; to gauge the responses of general practitioners in training to these new consultation aids. Design: Qualitative study based on focus group discussions. Setting: General practice vocational training schemes in South Wales. Participants: 39 general practice registrars and eight course organisers attended four sessions; three simulated patients attended each time. Method: Registrars consulting with simulated patients used verbal or “qualitative” descriptions of risks, then numerical data, and finally graphical presentations of the same data. Responses of doctors and patients were explored by semistructured discussions that had been audiotaped for transcription and analysis. Results: The process of using risk communication tools in simulated consultations was acceptable to general practitioner registrars. Providing doctors with information about risks and benefits of treatment options was generally well received. Both doctors and patients found it helped communication There were concerns about the lack of available, unbiased, and applicable evidence and a shortage of time in the consultation to discuss treatment options adequately. Graphical presentation of information was often favoured—an approach that also has the potential to save consultation time. Conclusions: A range of risk communication “tools” with which to discuss treatment options is likely to be more applicable than a single new strategy. These tools should include both absolute and relative risk information formats, presented in an unbiased way. Using risk communication tools in simulated consultations provides a model for training in risk communication for professional groups. Involving patients in decisions about their treatment or care improves health outcomes Successful involvement of patients requires effective communication of risks Having a range of risk communication tools from which to choose when discussing treatment options is likely to be more appropriate and flexible for clinical practice than single new strategies Different presentation formats include verbal descriptions of risks, numerical data, and graphical depiction of the information Graphical presentation of data on risk can be effective and save time in general practice consultationsKeywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Some Issues Arising in the Systematic Analysis of Focus Group MaterialsPublished by SAGE Publications ,1999
- Psychosocial/behavioral medicineJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1997
- Patients' Preferences for Risk Disclosure and Role in Decision Making for Invasive Medical ProceduresJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1997
- Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing.Psychological Bulletin, 1997
- Overview of Focus Group ResearchQualitative Health Research, 1995
- Communicating the Benefits of Chronic Preventive TherapyMedical Decision Making, 1995
- Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentrationBMJ, 1994
- The framing effect of relative and absolute riskJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1993
- Absolutely relative: How research results are summarized can affect treatment decisionsAmerican Journal Of Medicine, 1992
- Compliance to health recommendations: a theoretical overview of message framingHealth Education Research, 1988