临床医生在医院做代孕决定时使用“担心”语句

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Kristen E. Pecanac , Blair P. Golden
{"title":"临床医生在医院做代孕决定时使用“担心”语句","authors":"Kristen E. Pecanac ,&nbsp;Blair P. Golden","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2025.108788","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Current guidance of how to share a prognosis with patients or surrogate decision makers suggests the use of “I worry” statements. Despite this guidance, there is little known about how “worry” or “concern” statements are used in clinical settings. The purpose of this analysis was to examine the function of “worry” statements in clinician-surrogate decision-making conversations with life-or-death implications.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We audio recorded 27 clinician-surrogate conversations in two hospitals in one Midwest city in the USA. We used conversation analysis, a qualitative method, to analyze clinicians’ use of “worry” statements throughout the corpus and what course of action they were “doing” in the interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There were two distinct uses of “worry” statements<strong>.</strong> Clinicians’ use of “worry” statements to convey the gravity of the patient's situation of a poor prognosis seemed to forecast an introduction to limiting treatment as a potential option. When discussing treatment, “worry” statements seemed to have a persuasive function against pursuing treatment. Surrogates often resisted “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment, as these statements conveyed restricting choices that surrogates have the authority to make.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The balance of the clinician’s epistemic authority of the medical understanding of the patient’s situation with the surrogate’s authority in making a decision is worthy of further exploration.</div></div><div><h3>Practice Implications</h3><div>Surrogate resistance to “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment may be more a function of the persuasion to limit treatment than the “worry” statements themselves. Further research is necessary to determine best practice language during treatment deliberation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"137 ","pages":"Article 108788"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinician use of ‘worry’ statements during surrogate decision making in the hospital\",\"authors\":\"Kristen E. Pecanac ,&nbsp;Blair P. Golden\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pec.2025.108788\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Current guidance of how to share a prognosis with patients or surrogate decision makers suggests the use of “I worry” statements. Despite this guidance, there is little known about how “worry” or “concern” statements are used in clinical settings. The purpose of this analysis was to examine the function of “worry” statements in clinician-surrogate decision-making conversations with life-or-death implications.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We audio recorded 27 clinician-surrogate conversations in two hospitals in one Midwest city in the USA. We used conversation analysis, a qualitative method, to analyze clinicians’ use of “worry” statements throughout the corpus and what course of action they were “doing” in the interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There were two distinct uses of “worry” statements<strong>.</strong> Clinicians’ use of “worry” statements to convey the gravity of the patient's situation of a poor prognosis seemed to forecast an introduction to limiting treatment as a potential option. When discussing treatment, “worry” statements seemed to have a persuasive function against pursuing treatment. Surrogates often resisted “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment, as these statements conveyed restricting choices that surrogates have the authority to make.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The balance of the clinician’s epistemic authority of the medical understanding of the patient’s situation with the surrogate’s authority in making a decision is worthy of further exploration.</div></div><div><h3>Practice Implications</h3><div>Surrogate resistance to “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment may be more a function of the persuasion to limit treatment than the “worry” statements themselves. Further research is necessary to determine best practice language during treatment deliberation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49714,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Education and Counseling\",\"volume\":\"137 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108788\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Education and Counseling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399125001557\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Education and Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399125001557","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标目前关于如何与患者或代理决策者分享预后的指导建议使用 "我担心 "声明。尽管有这样的指导,但人们对 "担心 "或 "关注 "声明在临床环境中如何使用却知之甚少。本分析的目的是研究 "担心 "语句在临床医生-代理决策人涉及生死的对话中的作用。我们使用对话分析这一定性方法,分析了整个语料库中临床医生对 "担心 "语句的使用情况,以及他们在互动中 "采取 "的行动方案。临床医生使用 "担心 "语句来表达病人预后不佳的严重情况,似乎是在预告限制治疗是一种可能的选择。在讨论治疗问题时,"担心 "的陈述似乎具有反对进行治疗的说服功能。在讨论治疗时,代治者通常会抵制 "担心 "的陈述,因为这些陈述传达了限制性的选择,而代治者有权做出这种选择。结论临床医生对患者情况的医学认识权威与代治者做出决定的权威之间的平衡值得进一步探讨。有必要开展进一步研究,以确定治疗讨论中的最佳实践用语。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinician use of ‘worry’ statements during surrogate decision making in the hospital

Objective

Current guidance of how to share a prognosis with patients or surrogate decision makers suggests the use of “I worry” statements. Despite this guidance, there is little known about how “worry” or “concern” statements are used in clinical settings. The purpose of this analysis was to examine the function of “worry” statements in clinician-surrogate decision-making conversations with life-or-death implications.

Methods

We audio recorded 27 clinician-surrogate conversations in two hospitals in one Midwest city in the USA. We used conversation analysis, a qualitative method, to analyze clinicians’ use of “worry” statements throughout the corpus and what course of action they were “doing” in the interaction.

Results

There were two distinct uses of “worry” statements. Clinicians’ use of “worry” statements to convey the gravity of the patient's situation of a poor prognosis seemed to forecast an introduction to limiting treatment as a potential option. When discussing treatment, “worry” statements seemed to have a persuasive function against pursuing treatment. Surrogates often resisted “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment, as these statements conveyed restricting choices that surrogates have the authority to make.

Conclusion

The balance of the clinician’s epistemic authority of the medical understanding of the patient’s situation with the surrogate’s authority in making a decision is worthy of further exploration.

Practice Implications

Surrogate resistance to “worry” statements in the discussion of treatment may be more a function of the persuasion to limit treatment than the “worry” statements themselves. Further research is necessary to determine best practice language during treatment deliberation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Patient Education and Counseling
Patient Education and Counseling 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
11.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Patient Education and Counseling is an interdisciplinary, international journal for patient education and health promotion researchers, managers and clinicians. The journal seeks to explore and elucidate the educational, counseling and communication models in health care. Its aim is to provide a forum for fundamental as well as applied research, and to promote the study of organizational issues involved with the delivery of patient education, counseling, health promotion services and training models in improving communication between providers and patients.
×
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