Browsing by Subject "clinicians"

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Clinician-Patient Small Talk: Comparing Competent Students and Expert Dentists in a Standardized Patient Encounter
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2016-04-08) Maupome, Gerardo; Holcomb, C.; Schrader, S.
    Objectives: To establish whether the frequency of non-diagnostic, non-management exchanges between clinicians and patient (socioemotional communication, SC) during the consultation differed between senior dental students and dentists, controlling for clinically driven exchanges of information. Methods: Dentists and students were recorded while undergoing a consultation with a live standardized patient, and subsequently interviewed by investigators; their shared interpretation of cognitive strategies were recorded and compared for differences in the presence of SC using a χ2 test; first consultation occurrence of SC using log-rank tests; and number of times that SC occurred using mixed-model ANOVA. Results: Most clinicians engaged in SC throughout the consultation with a few exceptions. Statistical analyses produced non-significant differences for overall SC presence (p=0.62), time to first instance of SC from overall start of the consultation (p=0.73), and time after first intraoral examination had taken place (p=0.76). Non-significant differences were also recorded for the summary of time intervals when SC occurred at time from overall start of the consultation (p=0.89), and time after first intra-oral examination had taken place (p=0.12). Conclusions: SC occurred in most clinicians. Patterns depicted this interaction occurring throughout the consultation, not concentrated at the beginning or end. SC did not appear to differ between experts and students in terms of prevalence, frequency, or timing. Future research should examine the detailed association between SC and diagnostic thinking processes, to further delineate their relationship and characterize possible pedagogical applications.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Daily Situational Brief, January 30, 2015
    (MESH Coalition, 1/30/2015) MESH Coalition
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    How Should Clinicians Respond to Language Barriers That Exacerbate Health Inequity?
    (AMA, 2021-02-01) Espinoza, Jason; Derrington, Sabrina; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Patients and families with limited English proficiency (LEP) face barriers to health care service access, experience lower quality care, and suffer worse health outcomes. LEP is an independent driver of health disparities and exacerbates other social determinants of health. Disparities due to language are particularly unjust because LEP is morally irrelevant and a source of unfair, unnecessary disadvantage. Clinicians and health care organizations have duties to intervene, which this article describes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Should We Think of Radiologists as Nonclinicians?
    (Elsevier, 2016-07) Flemming, Donald J.; Gunderman, Richard B.; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, IU School of Medicine
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Ten Principles for More Conservative, Care-Full Diagnosis
    (ACP, 2018-11) Schiff, Gordon D.; Martin, Stephen A.; Eidelman, David H.; Volk, Lynn A.; Ruan, Elise; Cassel, Christine; Galanter, William; Johnson, Mark; Jutel, Annemarie; Kroenke, Kurt; Lambert, Bruce L.; Lexchin, Joel; Myers, Sara; Miller, Alexa; Mushlin, Stuart; Sanders, Lisa; Sheikh, Aziz; Medicine, School of Medicine
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Values, quality, and evaluation in ethics consultation
    (Taylor & Francis, 2016) Wocial, Lucia D.; Molnar, Elizabeth; Ott, Mary A.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: The American Society for Bioethics and Humanities has recommended regular evaluation of the quality of health care ethics consultation. This article discusses the impact of ethics consultation on clinicians' perceptions of a patient's plan of care and on the personal values of clinicians who participated in an ethics consultation. Methods: Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, select data points were abstracted from case file report forms for ethics consultations over a 12-month period. Clinicians involved in the care of a patient who was the focus of an ethics consultation were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. Clinicians who initiated an ethics consultation, were interviewed during the course of an ethics consultation, or were present at a patient care conference attended by an ethics consultant were invited to participate. A purposive sampling approach was used to invite clinicians to participate in an in-person interview. Results: The survey response rate was 44.4% (123 respondents from 277 invited). More than 60% of participants felt the consultation helped clarify the values of the patient and/or patient's family and helped them clarify their own values. Only 32% of participants indicated the patient's plan of care changed as a result of the ethics consultation, yet 75% indicated their confidence in the plan of care increased as a result of the ethics consultation. Preliminary findings from the qualitative interviews support the overall positive assessments reported by survey respondents. Conclusions: Ethics consultation can help clinicians clarify their own values and helps them clarify the values of patients and patients' families. Ethics consultation offers meaningful support when clinicians face ethically challenging cases, provides an opportunity to address moral distress, and is viewed favorably by those who experience the resource.