To inform the development of recommendations to facilitate learning of skilled doctor–patient communication in the workplace, this qualitative study explores experiences of trainees and supervisors regarding how trainees learn communication and how supervisors support trainees’ learning in the workplace. We conducted a qualitative study in a general practice training setting, triangulating various sources of data to obtain a rich understanding of trainees and supervisors’ experiences: three focus group discussions, five discussions during training sessions and five individual interviews. Thematic network analysis was performed during an iterative process of data collection and analysis. We identified a communication learning cycle consisting of six phases: impactful experience, change in frame of reference, identification of communication strategies, experimentation with strategies, evaluation of strategies and incorporation into personal repertoire. Supervisors supported trainees throughout this process by creating challenges, confronting trainees with their behaviour and helping them reflect on its underlying mechanisms, exploring and demonstrating communication strategies, giving concrete practice assignments, creating safety, exploring the effect of strategies and facilitating repeated practice and reflection. Based on the experiences of trainees and supervisors, we conclude that skilled communication involves the development of a personal communication repertoire from which learners are able to apply strategies that fit the context and their personal style. After further validation of our findings, it may be recommended to give learners concrete examples, opportunities for repeated practise and reflection on personal frames of reference and the effect of strategies, as well as space for authenticity and flexibility. In the workplace, the clinical supervisor is able to facilitate all these essential conditions to support his/her trainee in becoming a skilled communicator.

Background In medical communication research, there has been a shift from ‘communication skills’ towards ‘skilled communication’, the latter implying the development of flexibility and creativity to tailor communication to authentic clinical situations. However, a lack of consensus currently exists what skilled communication entails. This study therefore aims to identify characteristics of a skilled communicator, hereby contributing to theory building in communication research and informing medical training. Method In 2020, six nominal group technique (NGT) sessions were conducted in the context of the general practitioner (GP) training programme engaging 34 stakeholders (i.e. GPs, GP residents, faculty members and researchers) based on their experience and expertise in doctor–patient communication. Participants in each NGT session rank‐ordered a ‘Top 7’ of characteristics of a skilled communicator. The output of the NGT sessions was analysed using mixed methods, including descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis during an iterative process. Results Rankings of the six sessions consisted of 191 items in total, which were organised into 41 clusters. Thematic content analysis of the identified 41 clusters revealed nine themes describing characteristics of a skilled communicator: (A) being sensitive and adapting to the patient; (B) being proficient in applying interpersonal communication; (C) self‐awareness, learning ability and reflective capacity; (D) being genuinely interested; (E) being proficient in applying patient‐centred communication; (F) goal‐oriented communication; (G) being authentic; (H) active listening; and (I) collaborating with the patient. Conclusions We conceptualise a skilled communication approach based on the identified characteristics in the present study to support learning in medical training. In a conceptual model, two parallel processes are key in developing adaptive expertise in communication: (1) being sensitive and adapting communication to the patient and (2) monitoring communication performance in terms of self‐awareness and reflective capacity. The identified characteristics and the conceptual model provide a base to develop a learner‐centred programme, facilitating repeated practice and reflection. Further research should investigate how learners can be optimally supported in becoming skilled communicators during workplace learning.

The potential of reflection for learning and development is broadly accepted across the medical curriculum. Our understanding of how exactly reflection yields its educational promise, however, is limited to broad hints at the relation between reflection and learning. Yet, such understanding is essential to the (re)design of reflection education for learning and development. In this qualitative study, we used participants’ video-stimulated comments on actual practice to identify features that do or do not make collaborative reflection valuable to participants. In doing so, we focus on aspects of the interactional process that constitute the educational activity of reflection. To identify valuable and less valuable features of collaborative reflection, we conducted one-on-one video-stimulated interviews with Dutch general practice residents about collaborative reflection sessions in their training program. Residents were invited to comment on any aspect of the session that they did or did not value. We synthesized all positively and negatively valued features and associated explanations put forward in residents’ narratives into shared normative orientations about collaborative reflection: what are the shared norms that residents display in telling about positive and negative experiences with collaborative reflection? These normative orientations display residents’ views on the aim of collaborative reflection (educational value for all) and the norms that allegedly contribute to realizing this aim (inclusivity and diversity, safety, and efficiency). These norms are also reflected in specific educational activities that ostensibly contribute to educational value. As such, the current synthesis of normative orientations displayed in residents’ narratives about valuable and less valuable elements of collaborative reflection deepen our understanding of reflection and its supposed connection with educational outcomes. Moreover, the current empirical endeavor illustrates the value of video-stimulated interviews as a tool to value features of educational processes for future educational enhancements.

BackgroundIn view of the paucity of evidence regarding effective ways of reassuring worried patients, this study explored reassuring strategies that are considered useful by general practitioners (GPs).MethodsIn a study using a qualitative observational design, we re-analysed an existing dataset of fifteen stimulated recall interviews in which GPs elaborated on their communication with patients in two videotaped consultations. Additionally we held stimulated recall interviews with twelve GPs about two consultations selected for a strong focus on reassurance.ResultsTo reassure patients, GPs pursued multiple goals: 1. influencing patients’ emotions by promoting trust, safety and comfort, which is considered to be reassuring in itself and supportive of patients’ acceptance of reassuring information and 2. influencing patients’ cognitions by challenging patients’ belief that their symptoms are indicative of serious disease, often followed by promoting patients’ belief that their symptoms are benign. GPs described several actions to activate mechanisms to achieve these goals.ConclusionsGPs described a wealth of reassuring strategies, which make a valuable contribution to the current literature on doctor-patient communication. This detailed description may provide practicing GPs with new tools and can inform future studies exploring the effectiveness of reassurance strategies.

BackgroundMany patients who consult their GP are worried about their health, but there is little empirical data on strategies for effective reassurance. To gain a better understanding of mechanisms for effective patient reassurance, we explored cognitions underlying patients’ worries, cognitions underlying reassurance and factors supporting patients’ reassuring cognitions.MethodsIn a qualitative study, we conducted stimulated recall interviews with 21 patients of 12 different GPs shortly after their consultation. We selected consultations in which the GPs aimed to reassure worried patients and used their videotaped consultation as a stimulus for the interview. The interviews were analysed with thematic coding and by writing interpretive summaries.ResultsPatients expressed four different core cognitions underlying their concerns: ‘I have a serious illness’, ‘my health problem will have adverse physical effects’, ‘my treatment will have adverse effects’ and ‘my health problem will negatively impact my life’. Patients mentioned a range of person-specific and context-specific cognitions as reasons for these core cognitions. Patients described five core reassuring cognitions: ‘I trust my doctor’s expertise’, ‘I have a trusting and supporting relationship with my doctor’, ‘I do not have a serious disease’, ‘my health problem is harmless’ and ‘my health problem will disappear.’ Factors expressed as reasons for these reassuring cognitions were GPs’ actions during the consultation as well as patients’ pre-existing cognitions about their GP, the doctor-patient relationship and previous events. Patients’ worrying cognitions were counterbalanced by specific reassuring cognitions, i.e. worrying and reassuring cognitions seemed to be interrelated.ConclusionsPatients described a wide range of worrying cognitions, some of which were not expressed during the consultation. Gaining a thorough understanding of the specific cognitions and tailoring reassuring strategies to them should be an effective way of achieving reassurance. The identified reassuring cognitions can guide doctors in applying these strategies in their daily practice.

No abstract

None

PURPOSE Although guidelines generally state that physicians should not treat their family members or friends (nonpatients), physicians regularly receive medical requests from nonpatients. We aimed to explore junior and senior family physicians' experiences with and attitudes toward managing medical requests from nonpatients. METHODSWe conducted a qualitative study with 7 focus groups with junior and senior physicians. We performed a thematic analysis during an iterative cycle of data collection and analysis.RESULTS When confronted with a medical request from a nonpatient, physicians first oriented themselves to the situation: who is this person, what is he or she asking of me, and where are we? Physicians next considered the following interrelated factors: (1) nature/strength of the relationship with the nonpatient, (2) amount of trust in his/her own knowledge and skills, (3) expected consequences of making mistakes, (4) importance of work-life balance, and (5) risk of disturbing the physician-patient process. Senior physicians applied more nuanced considerations when deciding whether to respond, whereas junior physicians experienced more difficulties dealing with these requests, were less inclined to respond, and were more concerned about disturbing the existing relationship that a person had with his/her own physician.CONCLUSIONS This study provides insight into the complexity that physicians face when managing medical questions and requests from nonpatients. Facilitated group discussions during which experiences are shared can help junior physicians become more confident in dealing with these complex issues as they formulate their own personal strategy regarding provision of medical advice or treatment to family and friends. 2018;16:45-51. https://doi Ann Fam Med