Review Dialogues as an Opportunity to Develop a Person-related Overall Diagnosis

O. Bahrs, K. Henze, F. Lowenstein, H. Abholz, Katharina Ilse, S. Wilm, Gertrud Bureick, S. Heim
{"title":"Review Dialogues as an Opportunity to Develop a Person-related Overall Diagnosis","authors":"O. Bahrs, K. Henze, F. Lowenstein, H. Abholz, Katharina Ilse, S. Wilm, Gertrud Bureick, S. Heim","doi":"10.5750/IJPCM.V5I3.545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In the long-term care of patients with chronic conditions, the process aspect of treatment is rarely in the focus of general practitioner(GP)-patient interactions. A specific interaction tool, the Review Dialogue (RD), has been developed to integrate patients’ health-related problems/risks as well as coping strategies/resources and to agree upon shared treatment objectives. Research question: Do periodical RDs contribute to a better achievement of treatment objectives and do they arrive at an overall diagnosis (Balint)? Methods: GPs were randomized either into an intervention group (extra training and regular RD with 20 patients with chronic conditions) or into a control group (usual care). Videos of a sub-sample of patients (5 per practice) were taken at four points in time. This paper focuses on a sub-sample of 125 video-recorded GP-patient interactions, analysed using a semi-standardised procedure (RLI). An in-depth analysis of a maximum variation sample of eight GPs’ videotapes across four points in time was made to identify professional interaction strategies. Results: Implementing the RD and creating an overall holistic diagnosis is case-specific with respect to both, the GPs and the patients. Fostering individualised care RDs might contribute to a better achievement of treatment objectives. Conclusions: Review Dialogues facilitate the GP-patient communication process about diagnostics and therapy helping to make the implied overall diagnosis explicit. Further research is needed.","PeriodicalId":402902,"journal":{"name":"the International Journal of Person-Centered Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"the International Journal of Person-Centered Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/IJPCM.V5I3.545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: In the long-term care of patients with chronic conditions, the process aspect of treatment is rarely in the focus of general practitioner(GP)-patient interactions. A specific interaction tool, the Review Dialogue (RD), has been developed to integrate patients’ health-related problems/risks as well as coping strategies/resources and to agree upon shared treatment objectives. Research question: Do periodical RDs contribute to a better achievement of treatment objectives and do they arrive at an overall diagnosis (Balint)? Methods: GPs were randomized either into an intervention group (extra training and regular RD with 20 patients with chronic conditions) or into a control group (usual care). Videos of a sub-sample of patients (5 per practice) were taken at four points in time. This paper focuses on a sub-sample of 125 video-recorded GP-patient interactions, analysed using a semi-standardised procedure (RLI). An in-depth analysis of a maximum variation sample of eight GPs’ videotapes across four points in time was made to identify professional interaction strategies. Results: Implementing the RD and creating an overall holistic diagnosis is case-specific with respect to both, the GPs and the patients. Fostering individualised care RDs might contribute to a better achievement of treatment objectives. Conclusions: Review Dialogues facilitate the GP-patient communication process about diagnostics and therapy helping to make the implied overall diagnosis explicit. Further research is needed.
回顾对话作为发展与人相关的全面诊断的机会
背景:在慢性疾病患者的长期护理中,治疗过程方面很少成为全科医生(GP)-患者互动的重点。已经开发了一个具体的互动工具,即审查对话(RD),以整合患者的健康相关问题/风险以及应对策略/资源,并就共同的治疗目标达成一致。研究问题:周期性的rd是否有助于更好地实现治疗目标,它们是否能得出全面的诊断(巴林)?方法:将全科医生随机分为干预组(20例慢性疾病患者进行额外训练和常规RD)和对照组(常规护理)。在四个时间点拍摄患者亚样本(每次实践5人)的视频。本文着重于125个视频记录gp -患者相互作用的子样本,使用半标准化程序(RLI)进行分析。对八个全科医生的录像带在四个时间点上的最大变化样本进行了深入分析,以确定专业互动策略。结果:实施RD和创建一个整体的整体诊断是具体的情况下,尊重双方,全科医生和患者。促进个性化护理rd可能有助于更好地实现治疗目标。结论:回顾对话促进了gp -患者关于诊断和治疗的沟通过程,有助于使隐含的总体诊断明确。需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信