The Impact of Communication Skills Training in Oncology: a Linguistic Analysis

This study aimed to investigate the impact of a communication skills training (CST) in oncology on clinicians' linguistic strategies. A verbal communication analysis software (Logiciel d'Analyse de la Communication Verbale) was used to compare simulated patients interviews with oncology clinicians who participated in CST (N = 57) (pre/post with a 6-month interval) with a control group of oncology clinicians who did not (N = 56) (T1/T2 with a 6-month interval). A significant improvement of linguistic strategies related to biomedical, psychological and social issues was observed. Analysis of linguistic aspects of videotaped interviews might become in the future a part of individualised feedback in CST and utilised as a marker for an evaluation of trainin

Patients : sujets avant d’être partenaires

Patients et professionnels de la santé souhaitent-ils devenir des partenaires dans la relation de soins ? Il est dans l’air du temps de le croire. Mais rien n’assure que ce soit le cas. L’analyse de données collectées auprès de l’Espace Patients & Proches, où les usagers du CHUV déposent leurs doléances liées à des difficultés rencontrées à l’hôpital, montre que les patients, leurs proches comme les professionnels de la santé souffrent d’un processus de dé-subjectivisation alimenté par la place grandissante des technologies et la standardisation des prises en charge. Ils éprouvent d’abord le besoin d’être reconnus comme des sujets avant de pouvoir envisager de devenir des partenaires. Ni les uns ni les autres ne formulent d’attentes quant à une relation égalitaire. Les tentatives allant dans ce sens sont parfois même vécues comme douloureuses

Medical Students' Skills and Needs for Training in Breaking Bad News

This study assessed medical students' perception of individual vs. group training in breaking bad news (BBN) and explored training needs in BBN. Master-level students (N = 124) were randomised to group training (GT)—where only one or two students per group conducted a simulated patient (SP) interview, which was discussed collectively with the faculty—or individual training (IT)—where each student conducted an SP interview, which was discussed during individual supervision. Training evaluation was based on questionnaires, and the videotaped interviews were rated using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Students were globally satisfied with the training. Still, there were noticeable differences between students performing an interview (GT/IT) and students observing interviews (GT). The analysis of the interviews showed significant differences according to scenarios and to gender. Active involvement through SP interviews seems required for students to feel able to reach training objectives. The evaluation of communication skills, revealing a baseline heterogeneity, supports individualised trainin

Mandatory communication skills training for oncologists: enforcement does not substantially impact satisfaction

Purpose: Even though there is evidence that both patients and oncology clinicians are affected by the quality of communication and that communication skills can be effectively trained, so-called Communication Skills Trainings (CSTs) remain heterogeneously implemented. Methods: A systematic evaluation of the level of satisfaction of oncologists with the Swiss CST before (2000-2005) and after (2006-2012) it became mandatory. Results: Levels of satisfaction with the CST were high, and satisfaction of physicians participating on a voluntary or mandatory basis did not significantly differ for the majority of the items. Conclusions: The evaluation of physicians' satisfaction over the years and after introduction of mandatory training supports recommendations for generalized implementation of CST and mandatory training for medical oncologists

Dunno if you've any plans for the future: medical student indirect questioning in simulated oncology interviews

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This exploratory study investigated the motives of medical students (N = 63) for using indirect questions of the type <it>I don't know if </it>[you have already heard about chemotherapies], <it>I don't know how </it>[you are], or <it>I don't know what </it>[you do for a living] in simulated patient interviews during a communication skills course.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p><it>I don't know </it>questions (IDK-Qs) were observed during the initial evaluation of students' communication skills; they were systematically identified through video screening and subjected to a qualitative content and discourse analysis considering their context, their content, their intent and their effect on the simulated patients. To evaluate the specificity of medical students' IDK-Qs, the data were compared with a data set of oncologists (N = 31) conducting simulated patient interviews in the context of a Communication Skills Training (CST).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>During the interviews, 41.3% of the students asked 1-6 IDK-Qs. The IDK-Qs were attributed to three content categories: medical/treatment questions (N = 24); lifestyle/psychosocial questions (N = 18); and "inviting questions" questions (N = 11). Most of the IDK-Qs had an exploratory function (46/53), with simulated patients providing detailed responses or asking for more information (36/53). IDK-Qs were rare in the oncologist sample compared to the student sample (5 vs. 53 occurrences).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>IDK-Qs showed a question design difference between medical students and oncologists in simulated patient interviews. Among other reasons for this difference, the possible function of IDK-Qs as a protective linguistic strategy and marker for psychological discomfort is discussed.</p