Research on educating physicians to deliver high-value, cost-conscious care suggests that learning by practicing physicians, resident physicians, and medical students is promoted by combining specific knowledge transmission, reflective practice, and a supportive environment. These factors should be considered when educational interventions are being developed.
Training for improving ICC can be developed as an extension of the existing training for patient-centered communication.
IntroductionIntercultural communication (ICC) between doctors and patients is often associated with misunderstandings and dissatisfaction. To develop ICC-specific medical education, it is important to find out which ICC skills medical specialists currently apply in daily clinical consultations.MethodsDoctor-patient consultations of Dutch doctors with non-Dutch patients were videotaped in a multi-ethnic hospital in the Netherlands. The consultations were analyzed using the validated MAAS-Global assessment list in combination with factors influencing ICC, as described in the literature.ResultsIn total, 39 videotaped consultations were analyzed. The doctors proved to be capable of practising many communication skills, such as listening and empathic communication behaviour. Other skills were not practised, such as being culturally aware and checking the patient’s language ability.ConclusionWe showed that doctors did practice some but not all the relevant ICC skills and that the ICC style of the doctors was mainly biomedically centred. Furthermore, we discussed the possible overlap between intercultural and patient-centred communication. Implications for practice could be to implement the relevant ICC skills in the existing communication training or develop a communication training with a patient-centred approach including ICC skills.
ObjectivesTo explore patients’ preferences and experiences regarding intercultural communication which could influence the development of intercultural patient-centred communication training.MethodsThis qualitative study is based on interviews with non-native patients. Thirty non-native patients were interviewed between September and December 2015 about their preferences and experiences regarding communication with a native Dutch doctor. Fourteen interviews were established with an interpreter. The semi-structured interviews took place in Amsterdam. They were focused on generic and intercultural communication skills of doctors. Relevant fragments were coded by two researchers and analysed by the research team by means of thematic network analysis. Informed consent and ethical approval was obtained beforehand.ResultsAll patients preferred a doctor with a professional patient-centred attitude regardless of the doctor’s background. Patients mentioned mainly generic communication aspects, such as listening, as important skills and seemed to be aware of their own responsibility in participating in a consultation. Being treated as a unique person and not as a disease was also frequently mentioned. Unfamiliarity with the Dutch healthcare system influenced the experienced communication negatively. However, a language barrier was considered the most important problem, which would become less pressing once a doctor-patient relation was established. ConclusionsRemarkably, patients in this study had no preference regarding the ethnic background of the doctor. Generic communication was experienced as important as specific intercultural communication, which underlines the marginal distinction between these two. A close link between intercultural communication and patient-centred communication was reflected in the expressed preference ‘to be treated as a person’.
BackgroundEvaluating the quality of postgraduate medical education (PGME) programs through accreditation is common practice worldwide. Accreditation is shaped by educational quality and quality management. An appropriate accreditation design is important, as it may drive improvements in training. Moreover, accreditors determine whether a PGME program passes the assessment, which may have major consequences, such as starting, continuing or discontinuing PGME. However, there is limited evidence for the benefits of different choices in accreditation design. Therefore, this study aims to explain how changing views on educational quality and quality management have impacted the design of the PGME accreditation system in the Netherlands.MethodsTo determine the historical development of the Dutch PGME accreditation system, we conducted a document analysis of accreditation documents spanning the past 50 years and a vision document outlining the future system. A template analysis technique was used to identify the main elements of the system.ResultsFour themes in the Dutch PGME accreditation system were identified: (1) objectives of accreditation, (2) PGME quality domains, (3) quality management approaches and (4) actors’ responsibilities. Major shifts have taken place regarding decentralization, residency performance and physician practice outcomes, and quality improvement. Decentralization of the responsibilities of the accreditor was absent in 1966, but this has been slowly changing since 1999. In the future system, there will be nearly a maximum degree of decentralization. A focus on outcomes and quality improvement has been introduced in the current system. The number of formal documents striving for quality assurance has increased enormously over the past 50 years, which has led to increased bureaucracy. The future system needs to decrease the number of standards to focus on measurable outcomes and to strive for quality improvement.ConclusionThe challenge for accreditors is to find the right balance between trusting and controlling medical professionals. Their choices will be reflected in the accreditation design. The four themes could enhance international comparisons and encourage better choices in the design of accreditation systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.