Healthcare provider and patient perspectives on diagnostic imaging investigations

Chandra R Makanjee, Anne-Marie Bergh, Willem A Hoffmann, Chandra R Makanjee, Anne-Marie Bergh, Willem A Hoffmann

Abstract

Background: Much has been written about the patient-centred approach in doctor-patient consultations. Little is known about interactions and communication processes regarding healthcare providers' and patients' perspectives on expectations and experiences of diagnostic imaging investigations within the medical encounter. Patients journey through the health system from the point of referral to the imaging investigation itself and then to the post-imaging consultation. AIM AND SETTING: To explore healthcare provider and patient perspectives on interaction and communication processes during diagnostic imaging investigations as part of their clinical journey through a healthcare complex.

Methods: A qualitative study was conducted, with two phases of data collection. Twenty-four patients were conveniently selected at a public district hospital complex and were followed throughout their journey in the hospital system, from admission to discharge. The second phase entailed focus group interviews conducted with providers in the district hospital and adjacent academic hospital (medical officers and family physicians, nurses, radiographers, radiology consultants and registrars).

Results: Two main themes guided our analysis: (1) provider perspectives; and (2) patient dispositions and reactions. Golden threads that cut across these themes are interactions and communication processes in the context of expectations, experiences of the imaging investigations and the outcomes thereof.

Conclusion: Insights from this study provide a better understanding of the complexity of the processes and interactions between providers and patients during the imaging investigations conducted as part of their clinical pathway. The interactions and communication processes are provider-patient centred when a referral for a diagnostic imaging investigation is included.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The data-analysis process.

References

    1. Bairstow P, Persaud J, Mendelson R, et al. Reducing inappropriate diagnostic practice through education and decision support. Int J Qual Health Care. 2010;22(3):194–200.
    1. Patel VL, Kaufman DR, Arocha JF.. Methodological review: Emerging paradigms of cognition in medical decision-making. J Biomed Inform. 2002;35(1):52–75.
    1. Malone J, Guleria R, Craven C, et al. Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: Some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation. Brit J Radiol. 2012;85(1013):523–538.
    1. Hofmann B, Lysdahl K.. Moral principles and medical practice: The role of patient autonomy in the extensive use of radiological services. J Med Ethics. 2008;34(6):446–449.
    1. Larsson W, Lundberg N, Hillergård K.. Use your good judgement – radiographers’ knowledge in image production work. Radiography. 2009;15(3):e11–e21.
    1. Kenen RH. The at-risk health status and technology: A diagnostic invitation and the ‘gift’ of knowing. Soc Sci Med. 1996;42(11):1545–1553.
    1. Gray V. Reducing radiation exposure in diagnostic imaging [document on the Internet]. c2010 [cited 2011 Apr 10] Available from:
    1. Kravitz RL, Callahan EJ.. Patient’s perceptions of omitted examinations and tests: A qualitative analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15(1):38–45.
    1. Epstein RM, Fiscella K, Lesser CS, et al. Why the nation needs a policy push on patient-centered health care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(8):1489–1495.
    1. Jordan JL, Ellis SJ, Chambers R.. Defining shared decision making and concordance: Are they one and the same? Postgrad Med J. 2002;78(921):383–384.
    1. Van Ravesteijn H, Van Dijk I, Darmon D, et al. The reassuring value of diagnostic tests: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(1):3–8.
    1. Kravitz R. The physician-patient relationship: Measuring patients’ expectations and requests. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134(9 Pt 2):881–888.
    1. Munn Z, Jordan Z.. The patient experience of high technology medical imaging: A systematic review of the qualitative evidence. Radiography. 2011;17(4):323–331.
    1. Nightingale J, Murphy F, Blakeley C. ‘I thought it was just an x-ray’: A qualitative investigation of patient experiences in cardiac SPECT-CT imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33(3):246–254.
    1. Creswell J. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches 2nd ed Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2007.
    1. Ng CKC, White P.. Qualitative research design and approaches in radiography. Radiography. 2005;11(3):217–225.
    1. Leigh J. A tale of the unexpected: Managing an insider dilemma by adopting the role of outsider in another setting. Qual Res. 2014;14(4):428–441.
    1. Espeland A, Baerheim A.. Factors affecting general practitioners’ decisions about plain radiography for back pain: Implications for classification of guideline barriers – a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2003;3:8
    1. Baker R, Lecouturier J, Bond S.. Explaining variation in GP referral rates for x-rays for back pain. Implement Sci. 2006;1:15
    1. Jayadevappa R, Chattre S.. Patient centred care – a conceptual model and review of the state of art. Open Health Serv Policy J. 2011;4:15–25.
    1. Reeves PJ, Decker S.. Diagnostic radiography: A study in distancing. Radiography. 2012;18(2):78–83.
    1. Murphy F. Understanding the humanistic interaction with medical imaging technology. Radiography. 2001;7(3):193–201.
    1. Mabuza L, Omole OB, Govender I, et al. Reasons for inpatients not to seek clarity at Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospital, Pretoria. Afr J Prm Health Care Fam Med. 2014;6(1):Art. #576, 8 pages.
    1. Kiesler DJ, Auerbach SM.. Optimal matches of patient preferences for information, decision-making and interpersonal behavior: Evidence, models and interventions. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;61(3):319–341.
    1. Malterud K, Taksdal A.. Shared spaces for reflection: Approaching medically unexplained disorders. Junctures. 2007;9:27–38.
    1. Longtin Y, Sax H, Leape L, et al. Patient participation: Current knowledge and applicability to patient safety. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(1):53–62.
    1. Health Professions Council of South Africa Guidelines for good practice in the health care professions National Patients’ Rights Charter. Booklet 3. Pretoria: Health Professions Council of South Africa; 2008.
    1. Republic of South Africa National Health Act, 2003 (Act No. 61 of 2003) (Chapter 2, p. 11–30). Government Gazette. 2004;No 26595.
    1. Dauer LT, Thornton RH, Hay JL, et al. Fears, feelings, and facts: Interactively communicating benefits and risks of medical radiation with patients. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(4):756–761.
    1. Barry CA, Bradley C, Britten N, et al. Patients’ unvoiced agendas in general practice consultations. BMJ. 2001;320:1246–1250.
    1. Murphy FJ. The paradox of imaging technology: A review of the literature. Radiography. 2006;12(2):169–174.
    1. Olivier L, Leclère J, Dolbeault S, et al. Doctor-patient relationship in oncologic radiology. Cancer Imaging. 2005;11(5):S83–S88.
    1. Undeland M, Malterud K.. Diagnostic work in general practice: More than naming a disease. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2002;20(3):145–150.
    1. Kasper J, Légaré F, Scheibler F, et al. Turning signals into meanings – ‘shared decision making’ meets communication theory. Health Expect. 2011;15(1):3–11.
    1. Giroldi E, Veldhuizen W, Mannaerts A, et al. ‘Doctor, please tell me it’s nothing serious’: An exploration of patients’ worrying and reassuring cognitions using simulated recall interviews. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:73
    1. Tamura-Lis W. Teach-back for quality education and patient safety. Urol Nurs. 2013;33(6):267–271, 298.
    1. DeWalt DA, Broucksou KA, Hawk V, et al. Developing and testing the health literacy universal precautions toolkit. Nurs Outlook. 2011;59(2):85–94.
    1. Farrell EH, Whistance RN, Phillips K, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of audio-visual information aids for informed consent for invasive healthcare procedures in clinical practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(1):20–32.
    1. Middleton JF, McKinley RK, Gillies CL.. Effect of patient completed agenda forms and doctors’ education about agenda on the outcome of consultations: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332(7552):1238–1242.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj