What are the underlying reasons behind socioeconomic differences in doctor‐patient communication in head and neck oncology review clinics
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 19508522 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Sarah Allen (0000-0003-0274-4137, Department of Health Services Research Institute of Population Health Sciences University of Liverpool Liverpool UK, autor correspondente), S N Rogers (0000-0002-5989-6142, University of Liverpool), Stephen L Brown (0000-0002-6142-0995, Department of Psychological Sciences Institute of Population Health Sciences Liverpool UK), Rebecca Harris (0000-0002-5891-6826, Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust), Rebecca V Harris (Department of Health Services Research Institute of Population Health Sciences Liverpool UK) |
| Ano | 2021 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Fascículo | 1 |
| Páginas | 140-151 |
| Data de publicação | 2021-02-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Health Expectations (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625 |
| Editora | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/hex.13163 |
| PMID | 33227177 |
| OpenAlex | W3108046569 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 2 |
| Referências citadas | 39 |
OBJECTIVE: To explore socioeconomic status (SES) differences in patterns of doctor-patient communication within head and neck cancer clinics and why such differences exist. METHODS: Thirty-six head and neck cancer review appointments with five Physicians were observed and audio-taped, along with follow-up interviews involving 32 patients. Data were analysed using Thematic Analysis, and compared by patient SES (education, occupation and Indices of Multiple Deprivation). RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (a) Physicians used more humour and small talk in their consultations with high SES patients; (b) Low SES patients were more passive in their participation, engaged in less agenda setting and information-seeking, and framed their clinical experience differently; (c) Low SES patients had different preferences for involvement, defining involvement differently to high SES patients and were seen to take a more stoical approach. CONCLUSION: Low SES patients take a more passive role in medical consultations, engage in less relational talk and are less likely to raise concerns, but were satisfied with this. Physicians may adapt their communication behaviour in response to low SES patients' expectations and preferences. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A question prompt list may help low SES patients to raise concerns during their consultations. This may reduce inequalities in communication and health
Cancer · Family medicine · Head and neck · Head and neck cancer · Inequality · Population · Qualitative research · Socioeconomic status · Thematic analysis · Cancer survivorship and care · Health Literacy and Information Accessibility · Medicine · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology · Internal Medicine · Surgery
Socio-economic status of the patient and doctor–patient communication
Patient-centred consultations and outcomes in primary care
Patient-centered communication in cancer care: Promoting healing and reducing suffering
What are the underlying reasons behind socioeconomic differences in doctor‐patient communication in head and neck oncology review clinics
Socio‐economic differences in patient participation behaviours in doctor–patient interactions—A systematic mapping review of the literature
Just do it
Frame Negotiation in Doctor-Elderly Patient Consultations
Socioeconomic Status and Financial Coping Strategies
Socioeconomic differences in coping with childbearing
Meta-analysis of Correlates of Provider Behavior in Medical Encounters
Patient Preferences for Medical Decision Making
Individualisation and inequalities in health
Interpersonal perception in the context of doctor-patient relationships
Psychobiological mechanisms of socioeconomic differences in health
Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women
Talking with Me or Talking at Me? The Impact of Status Characteristics on Doctor-Patient Interaction
Status Organizing Processes
| Obras citantes distintas | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 0,4 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2021 - 2023 (3) |
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 2 |