Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Dec;93(3):573-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.08.023. Epub 2013 Sep 4.

Physician communication styles in initial consultations for hematological cancer

Affiliations

Physician communication styles in initial consultations for hematological cancer

Karan R Chhabra et al. Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To characterize practices in subspecialist physicians' communication styles, and their potential effects on shared decision-making, in second-opinion consultations.

Methods: Theme-oriented discourse analysis of 20 second-opinion consultations with subspecialist hematologist-oncologists.

Results: Physicians frequently "broadcasted" information about the disease, treatment options, relevant research, and prognostic information in extended, often-uninterrupted monologs. Their communicative styles had one of two implications: conveying options without offering specific recommendations, or recommending one without incorporating patients' goals and values into the decision. Some physicians, however, used techniques that encouraged patient participation.

Conclusions: Broadcasting may be a suboptimal method of conveying complex treatment information in order to support shared decision-making. Interventions could teach techniques that encourage patient participation.

Practice implications: Techniques such as open-ended questions, affirmations of patients' expressions, and pauses to check for patient understanding can mitigate the effects of broadcasting and could be used to promote shared decision-making in information-dense subspecialist consultations.

Keywords: Information delivery; Oncology consultations; Patient participation; Physician–patient communication; Physician–patient relationships; Second opinions; Shared decision-making; US.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Patenaude A, Rappeport J, Smith B. The physician’s influence on informed consent for bone marrow transplantation. Theor Med Bioeth. 1986;7:165–79. - PubMed
    1. Gaston CM, Mitchell G. Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:2252–64. - PubMed
    1. Lee H, Lee YC, Shin S, Park JC, Shin SK, Lee SK, Noh SH. Participation and conflict in the decision-making process for endoscopic resection or surgical gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2012;106:101–6. - PubMed
    1. Goldman RE, Sullivan A, Back AL, Alexander SC, Matsuyama RK, Lee SJ. Patients’ reflections on communication in the second-opinion hematology-oncology consultation. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;76:44–50. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cameron D. Working with spoken discourse. Sage Publications Limited; 2001.

Publication types