Negotiating explanations: doctor-patient communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms-a qualitative analysis

Madelon den Boeft, Daniëlle Huisman, Lakrista Morton, Peter Lucassen, Johannes C van der Wouden, Marjan J Westerman, Henriëtte E van der Horst, Christopher D Burton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) seek explanations for their symptoms, but often find general practitioners (GPs) unable to deliver these. Different methods of explaining MUPS have been proposed. Little is known about how communication evolves around these explanations.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the dialogue between GPs and patients related to explanations in a community-based clinic for MUPS. We categorized dialogue types and dialogue outcomes.

METHODS: Patients were ≥18 years with inclusion criteria for moderate MUPS: ≥2 referrals to specialists, ≥1 functional syndrome/symptoms, ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and GP's judgement that symptoms were unexplained. We analysed transcripts of 112 audio-recorded consultations (39 patients and 5 GPs) from two studies on the Symptoms Clinic Intervention, a consultation intervention for MUPS in primary care. We used constant comparative analysis to code and classify dialogue types and outcomes.

RESULTS: We extracted 115 explanation sequences. We identified four dialogue types, differing in the extent to which the GP or patient controlled the dialogue. We categorized eight outcomes of the sequences, ranging from acceptance to rejection by the patient. The most common outcome was holding (conversation suspended in an unresolved state), followed by acceptance. Few explanations were rejected by the patient. Co-created explanations by patient and GP were most likely to be accepted.

CONCLUSION: We developed a classification of dialogue types and outcomes in relation to explanations offered by GPs for MUPS patients. While it requires further validation, it provides a framework, which can be used for teaching, evaluation of practice and research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)107-113
Number of pages7
JournalFamily Practice
Volume34
Issue number1
Early online date19 Nov 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2017

Fingerprint

Negotiating
Communication
General Practitioners
Referral and Consultation
Medically Unexplained Symptoms
Primary Health Care
Teaching

Keywords

  • physician-patient relations
  • psychosomatic medicine
  • communication
  • primary health care
  • qualitative research
  • somatoform disorders
  • diagnosis
  • aetiology
  • psychology

Cite this

Negotiating explanations : doctor-patient communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms-a qualitative analysis. / den Boeft, Madelon; Huisman, Daniëlle; Morton, Lakrista; Lucassen, Peter; van der Wouden, Johannes C; Westerman, Marjan J; van der Horst, Henriëtte E; Burton, Christopher D.

In: Family Practice, Vol. 34, No. 1, 02.2017, p. 107-113.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

den Boeft, Madelon ; Huisman, Daniëlle ; Morton, Lakrista ; Lucassen, Peter ; van der Wouden, Johannes C ; Westerman, Marjan J ; van der Horst, Henriëtte E ; Burton, Christopher D. / Negotiating explanations : doctor-patient communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms-a qualitative analysis. In: Family Practice. 2017 ; Vol. 34, No. 1. pp. 107-113.
@article{76ca3579a22c4ee7b086ba4f937c189b,
title = "Negotiating explanations: doctor-patient communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms-a qualitative analysis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) seek explanations for their symptoms, but often find general practitioners (GPs) unable to deliver these. Different methods of explaining MUPS have been proposed. Little is known about how communication evolves around these explanations.OBJECTIVE: To examine the dialogue between GPs and patients related to explanations in a community-based clinic for MUPS. We categorized dialogue types and dialogue outcomes.METHODS: Patients were ≥18 years with inclusion criteria for moderate MUPS: ≥2 referrals to specialists, ≥1 functional syndrome/symptoms, ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and GP's judgement that symptoms were unexplained. We analysed transcripts of 112 audio-recorded consultations (39 patients and 5 GPs) from two studies on the Symptoms Clinic Intervention, a consultation intervention for MUPS in primary care. We used constant comparative analysis to code and classify dialogue types and outcomes.RESULTS: We extracted 115 explanation sequences. We identified four dialogue types, differing in the extent to which the GP or patient controlled the dialogue. We categorized eight outcomes of the sequences, ranging from acceptance to rejection by the patient. The most common outcome was holding (conversation suspended in an unresolved state), followed by acceptance. Few explanations were rejected by the patient. Co-created explanations by patient and GP were most likely to be accepted.CONCLUSION: We developed a classification of dialogue types and outcomes in relation to explanations offered by GPs for MUPS patients. While it requires further validation, it provides a framework, which can be used for teaching, evaluation of practice and research.",
keywords = "physician-patient relations, psychosomatic medicine, communication, primary health care, qualitative research, somatoform disorders, diagnosis, aetiology, psychology",
author = "{den Boeft}, Madelon and Dani{\"e}lle Huisman and Lakrista Morton and Peter Lucassen and {van der Wouden}, {Johannes C} and Westerman, {Marjan J} and {van der Horst}, {Henri{\"e}tte E} and Burton, {Christopher D}",
note = "Acknowledgements The authors thank all the participating GPs and patients in this study. Funding: This analysis was funded by a grant from VGZ Health Insurances and is part of the program for Innovation and Quality of Academic Primary Care. The program was set up to improve quality of care for patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care.",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1093/fampra/cmw113",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "107--113",
journal = "Family Practice",
issn = "0263-2136",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Negotiating explanations

T2 - doctor-patient communication with patients with medically unexplained symptoms-a qualitative analysis

AU - den Boeft, Madelon

AU - Huisman, Daniëlle

AU - Morton, Lakrista

AU - Lucassen, Peter

AU - van der Wouden, Johannes C

AU - Westerman, Marjan J

AU - van der Horst, Henriëtte E

AU - Burton, Christopher D

N1 - Acknowledgements The authors thank all the participating GPs and patients in this study. Funding: This analysis was funded by a grant from VGZ Health Insurances and is part of the program for Innovation and Quality of Academic Primary Care. The program was set up to improve quality of care for patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms in primary care.

PY - 2017/2

Y1 - 2017/2

N2 - BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) seek explanations for their symptoms, but often find general practitioners (GPs) unable to deliver these. Different methods of explaining MUPS have been proposed. Little is known about how communication evolves around these explanations.OBJECTIVE: To examine the dialogue between GPs and patients related to explanations in a community-based clinic for MUPS. We categorized dialogue types and dialogue outcomes.METHODS: Patients were ≥18 years with inclusion criteria for moderate MUPS: ≥2 referrals to specialists, ≥1 functional syndrome/symptoms, ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and GP's judgement that symptoms were unexplained. We analysed transcripts of 112 audio-recorded consultations (39 patients and 5 GPs) from two studies on the Symptoms Clinic Intervention, a consultation intervention for MUPS in primary care. We used constant comparative analysis to code and classify dialogue types and outcomes.RESULTS: We extracted 115 explanation sequences. We identified four dialogue types, differing in the extent to which the GP or patient controlled the dialogue. We categorized eight outcomes of the sequences, ranging from acceptance to rejection by the patient. The most common outcome was holding (conversation suspended in an unresolved state), followed by acceptance. Few explanations were rejected by the patient. Co-created explanations by patient and GP were most likely to be accepted.CONCLUSION: We developed a classification of dialogue types and outcomes in relation to explanations offered by GPs for MUPS patients. While it requires further validation, it provides a framework, which can be used for teaching, evaluation of practice and research.

AB - BACKGROUND: Patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) seek explanations for their symptoms, but often find general practitioners (GPs) unable to deliver these. Different methods of explaining MUPS have been proposed. Little is known about how communication evolves around these explanations.OBJECTIVE: To examine the dialogue between GPs and patients related to explanations in a community-based clinic for MUPS. We categorized dialogue types and dialogue outcomes.METHODS: Patients were ≥18 years with inclusion criteria for moderate MUPS: ≥2 referrals to specialists, ≥1 functional syndrome/symptoms, ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and GP's judgement that symptoms were unexplained. We analysed transcripts of 112 audio-recorded consultations (39 patients and 5 GPs) from two studies on the Symptoms Clinic Intervention, a consultation intervention for MUPS in primary care. We used constant comparative analysis to code and classify dialogue types and outcomes.RESULTS: We extracted 115 explanation sequences. We identified four dialogue types, differing in the extent to which the GP or patient controlled the dialogue. We categorized eight outcomes of the sequences, ranging from acceptance to rejection by the patient. The most common outcome was holding (conversation suspended in an unresolved state), followed by acceptance. Few explanations were rejected by the patient. Co-created explanations by patient and GP were most likely to be accepted.CONCLUSION: We developed a classification of dialogue types and outcomes in relation to explanations offered by GPs for MUPS patients. While it requires further validation, it provides a framework, which can be used for teaching, evaluation of practice and research.

KW - physician-patient relations

KW - psychosomatic medicine

KW - communication

KW - primary health care

KW - qualitative research

KW - somatoform disorders

KW - diagnosis

KW - aetiology

KW - psychology

U2 - 10.1093/fampra/cmw113

DO - 10.1093/fampra/cmw113

M3 - Article

C2 - 28122926

VL - 34

SP - 107

EP - 113

JO - Family Practice

JF - Family Practice

SN - 0263-2136

IS - 1

ER -