Thille Patricia, Ward Natalie, Russell Grant
Department of Sociology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. N.W., Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada.
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Ottawa, 120 University, Social Sciences Building, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada; Department of Anthropology, Mount Allison University, 144 Main St., Avard-Dixon, Sackville, NB E4L 1A7, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2014 May;108:97-105. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.02.041. Epub 2014 Feb 28.
A common refrain in chronic disease management is that patients and clinicians need to enact new roles: patients as their own caregivers; clinicians as professional supporters of patient self-management activities. These roles are central to self-management support (SMS), an approach that emphasizes a clinical partnership, and promotes patient identification and achievement of realistic and short-term behavioral goals. With SMS, behavior change is the desired end, not the means to a desired biomedical end. Shifting SMS concepts into clinical practice has proven to be difficult and inconsistent, creating potential, unknown risks or harms to patients. We completed a discourse analysis of 16 clinical dialogues between diabetic patients and clinicians, collected during a study of six Ontario Family Health Teams, to explore the questions of risks and harms relating to SMS implementation. We observed varying degrees of incomplete implementation of SMS, as well as interactions that actively negated the core principles. Contrary to SMS principles, clinicians tended to emphasize behavioral changes as means to achieve biomedical ends, though to varying degrees. We present two appointments in detail, highlighting how linking behavior change closely with biomedical measures often elicited face-saving defenses from patients. The subsequent dialogue shifted attention away from problem solving and behavior change into active negotiation of responsibility and identity. Interactions that oriented more to SMS concepts elicited fewer defensive maneuvers from patients. Our analysis helps explicate one additional mechanism by which self-management talk threatens the clinical relationship, and highlights a promising method to mitigate this threat.
慢性病管理中一个常见的观点是,患者和临床医生需要扮演新的角色:患者成为自己的护理者;临床医生成为患者自我管理活动的专业支持者。这些角色是自我管理支持(SMS)的核心,SMS是一种强调临床伙伴关系、促进患者识别并实现现实的短期行为目标的方法。在SMS中,行为改变是期望的结果,而不是实现期望的生物医学结果的手段。事实证明,将SMS概念转化为临床实践既困难又不一致,给患者带来了潜在的、未知的风险或危害。我们对在安大略省六个家庭健康团队的一项研究中收集的16段糖尿病患者与临床医生之间的临床对话进行了话语分析,以探讨与SMS实施相关的风险和危害问题。我们观察到SMS的实施存在不同程度的不完整,以及一些积极否定核心原则的互动。与SMS原则相反,临床医生倾向于将行为改变作为实现生物医学目标的手段,尽管程度有所不同。我们详细展示了两次预约,突出了将行为改变与生物医学措施紧密联系起来如何经常引发患者的保全面子的辩解。随后的对话将注意力从解决问题和行为改变转移到了对责任和身份的积极协商上。更倾向于SMS概念的互动引发患者的防御性策略较少。我们的分析有助于阐明自我管理谈话威胁临床关系的另一种机制,并突出了一种减轻这种威胁的有前景的方法。