Paskins Zoe, Sanders Tom, Croft Peter R, Hassell Andrew B
Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, United Kingdom
Section of Public Health, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Ann Fam Med. 2015 Nov;13(6):537-44. doi: 10.1370/afm.1866.
Patients and doctors report marked disenchantment with primary care consultation experiences relating to osteoarthritis. This study aimed to observe and analyze interactions between general practitioners (GPs) and patients presenting with osteoarthritis (OA) to identify how to improve care for OA.
We conducted an observational study in general practices in the United Kingdom using video-recorded real-life consultations of unselected patients and their GPs. Postconsultation interviews were conducted using video-stimulated recall. Both consultations and interviews were analyzed thematically.
Three key themes were identified in an analysis of 19 OA consultations and the matched GP and patient interviews: complexity, dissonance, and prioritization. The topic of osteoarthritis arises in the consultation in complex contexts of multimorbidity and multiple, often not explicit, patient agendas. Dissonance between patient and doctor was frequently observed and reported; this occurred when GPs normalized symptoms of OA as part of life and reassured patients who were not seeking reassurance. GPs used wear and tear in preference to osteoarthritis or didn't name the condition at all. GPs subconsciously made assumptions that patients did not consider OA a priority and that symptoms raised late in the consultation were not troublesome.
The lack of a clear illness profile results in confusion between patients and doctors about what OA is and its priority in the context of multimorbidity. This study highlights generic communication issues regarding the potential negative consequences of unsought reassurance and the importance of validation of symptoms and raises new arguments for tackling OA's identity crisis by developing a clearer medical language with which to explain OA.
患者和医生均表示对骨关节炎的初级保健咨询体验极度不满。本研究旨在观察和分析全科医生(GP)与骨关节炎(OA)患者之间的互动,以确定如何改善对OA的护理。
我们在英国的全科诊所进行了一项观察性研究,对未经挑选的患者及其GP进行了视频记录的真实咨询。咨询后使用视频刺激回忆进行访谈。对咨询和访谈均进行了主题分析。
在对19次OA咨询以及与之匹配的GP和患者访谈的分析中,确定了三个关键主题:复杂性、不一致性和优先级。骨关节炎这一话题在多种疾病并存以及患者有多个(通常不明确)议程的复杂背景下出现。经常观察到并报告患者与医生之间的不一致;当GP将OA症状视为生活的一部分而使其正常化,并安慰那些并不寻求安慰的患者时,就会出现这种情况。GP更倾向于使用“磨损”而非骨关节炎,或者根本不提及这种疾病。GP下意识地认为患者不将OA视为优先事项,且在咨询后期提出的症状并不麻烦。
缺乏明确的疾病概况导致患者和医生对OA是什么以及在多种疾病并存的情况下其优先级存在困惑。本研究突出了关于不必要的安慰可能产生的负面后果的一般性沟通问题以及对症状进行确认的重要性,并提出了通过开发更清晰的医学语言来解释OA以解决OA身份危机的新论据。