Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The effect of physician solicitation approaches on ability to identify patient concerns

Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

CONTEXT: Studies showing that physicians often interrupt the patient’s opening statement assume that this compromises data collection.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the association between such interruptions and physician accuracy in identifying patient concerns.

DESIGN: This study replicates the Beckman-Frankel methodology and adds exit interviews to assess physician understanding. The authors audiotaped a convenience sample of 70 encounters and surveyed both parties following the visit.

SETTING: A community-based ambulatory clinic.

PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents (77%) and attending physicians and their adult, English-speaking patients who were primarily low income and ethnic minority.

OUTCOME MEASURE: The Index of Understanding measures patientphysician problem list concordance. It is the percentage of patient problems, obtained on exit, that the physician correctly identifies.

RESULTS: In 26% of the visits, patients were allowed to complete their agenda without interruption; in 37% the physicians interrupted; and in 37% no inquiry about agenda was made in the first 5 minutes. Neither physician experience nor their assessment of time pressure or medical difficulty was associated with these rates. Exit interviews showed no significant difference in Index of Understanding between those involving completion of agenda (84.6%) and those involving patient interruption (82.4%) (P=.83). But when the physician did not solicit an agenda, the concordance was 59.2%, significantly lower than either the completion (P=.014) or the interruption group (P=.013).

CONCLUSION: Interruption as defined by Beckman-Frankel does not curtail ability to identify patient concerns, but failure to ask for the patient’s agenda associates with a 24% reduction in physician understanding.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Folger J, Poole MS. Relational coding schemes: the question of validity. In Poole MS, ed., Communication Yearbook 5. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zoppi K, Epstein RM. Is communication a skill? Communication behaviors and being in relation. Fam Med. 2002;34:319–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A, et al. The impact of patient-centered care on patient outcomes. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:796–804.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Street RL. Analyzing communication in medical consultations: do behavioral measures correspond to patients’ perceptions? Med Care. 1992;30:976–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beckman HB, Frankel RM. The effect of physician behavior on the collection of data. Ann Intern Med. 1984;101:692–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Marvel MK, Epstein RM, Flowers K, Beckman H. Soliciting the patient’s agenda: have we improved? JAMA. 1999;281:283–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. White J, Levinson W, Rotor D. “Oh, by the way...”: the closing moments of the medical visit. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9:24–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kroenke K. Patient expectations for care: how hidden is the agenda? Mayo Clinic Proc. 1998;73:191–3. Editorial.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Quill TE. Partnerships in patient care: a contractual approach. Ann Intern Med. 1983;95:228–34.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lipkin M Jr. The medical interview. In Lipkin M, Putnam SM, Lazare A, eds., Behavioral Medicine in Primary Care: A Practical Guide. Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange; 1997:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kern DE, Grayson M, Barker LR, et al. Residency training in interviewing skills and the psychosocial domain of medical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 1989;4:421–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rosenberg EE, Lussier M, Beaudoin C. Lessons for clinicians from physician-patient communication literature. Arch Fam Med. 1997;6:279–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Anderson H. A reflection on client-professional collaboration. Fam Syst Health. 1996;14:193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Smith RC. The Patient’s Story: An Evidence-based Method, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mauksch LB, Hillenburg L, Robins L. The establishing focus protocol: training for collaborative agenda setting and time management in the medical interview. Fam Syst Health. 2001;19:147–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Press I. Patient satisfaction with the outpatient experience. How does your organization measure up? Healthc Exec. 2003;18:94–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Frieden RB, Goldman L, Cecil RR. Patient-physician concordance in problem identification in the primary care setting. Ann Intern Med. 1980;93:490–3.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Feinstein AR. Principles of Medical Statistics. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Eisenthal S, Emery R, Lazare A, Udin H. “Adherence” and the negotiated approach to patienthood Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1979;36:393–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaplan SH, Greenfield S, Ware JE. Assessing the effects of physician-patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease. Med Care. 1989;27(suppl 3):S110-S127.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Dugdale DC, Epstein R, Pantilat SZ. Time and the patient-physician relationship. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14(suppl 1):S34-S40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Miller SH. Compliance with treatment regimens in chronic asymptomatic diseases. Am J Med. 1997;102(2A):43–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bass MJ, Buck C, Turner L, Dickie G, Pratt G, Robinson HG. The physician’s actions and the outcome of illness in family practice. J Fam Pract. 1986;23:43–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence Dyche MSW.

Additional information

There are no conflicts of interest to report for any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dyche, L., Swiderski, D. The effect of physician solicitation approaches on ability to identify patient concerns. J GEN INTERN MED 20, 267–270 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40266.x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40266.x

Key words

Navigation