Physician gaze shifts in patient-physician interactions:functions, accounts and responses

ObjectivesPhysician gaze towards patients is fundamental for medical consultations. Physicians’ use of Electronic Health Records (EHR) affects their gaze towards patients, and may negatively influence this interaction. We aimed to study conversation patterns during gaze shifts of physicians from the patient towards the EHR.MethodsOutpatient consultations (N=8) were eye-tracked. Interactions around physician gaze shifts towards the computer were transcribed.ResultsWe found that physician gaze shifts have different interactional functions, e.g., introducing a topic switch or entering data into the EHR. Furthermore, physicians differ in how they account for their gaze shifts, i.e., both implicitly and explicitly. Third, patients vary in treating the gaze shift as an indication to continue their turn or not.ConclusionsOur results suggest that physician gaze shifts vary in function, in how physicians account for them, and in how they influence the conversation. Future research should take into account distinctions when relating gaze to patient outcomes.Practice implicationsPhysicians may be aware of the interactional context of their gaze behaviour. Patients respond differently to various types of gaze shifts. How physicians handle gaze shifts can therefore have different consequences for the interaction

Exploring uncertainties regarding unsolicited findings in genetic testing

Objectives: Non-normative uncertainty (uncertainty about empirical facts) and normative uncertainty (uncertainty about moral values or beliefs) regarding unsolicited findings (UFs) might play an important role in clinical genetics. Identifying normative uncertainty is of special interest since it might guide towards novel directions for counseling practice. This study aims to gain insight into the role of non-normative and normative uncertainty regarding UFs, as expressed by counselees and counselors. Methods: We performed a secondary qualitative analysis of interviews with counselees (n = 20) and counselors (n = 20) who had been confronted with UFs. Following a deductive approach, we used Han et al.’s existing theoretical framework of uncertainty, in which we additionally incorporated normative uncertainty. Results: Major issues of non-normative uncertainty were practical and personal for counselees, whilst counselors’ uncertainty pertained mainly to scientific issues. Normative uncertainty was a major theme throughout the interviews. We encountered the moral conflicts of autonomy vs. beneficence and non-maleficence and of autonomy vs. truthfulness. Conclusion: Non-normative uncertainty regarding UFs highlights the need to gain more insight in their penetrance and clinical utility. This study suggests moral conflicts are a major source of feelings of uncertainty in clinical genetics. Practice implications: Exploring counselees’ non-normative uncertainties and normative conflicts seems a prerequisite to optimize genetic counseling.</p

'We don't know for sure':discussion of uncertainty concerning multigene panel testing during initial cancer genetic consultations

Pre-test counseling about multigene panel testing involves many uncertainties. Ideally, counselees are informed about uncertainties in a way that enables them to make an informed decision about panel testing. It is presently unknown whether and how uncertainty is discussed during initial cancer genetic counseling. We therefore investigated whether and how counselors discuss and address uncertainty, and the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), and explored associations between counselors' communication and their characteristics in consultations on panel testing for cancer. For this purpose, consultations of counselors discussing a multigene panel with a simulated patient were videotaped. Simulated patients represented a counselee who had had multiple cancer types, according to a script. Before and afterwards, counselors completed a survey. Counselors' uncertainty expressions, initiating and the framing of expressions, and their verbal responses to scripted uncertainties of the simulated patient were coded by two researchers independently. Coding was done according to a pre-developed coding scheme using The Observer XT software for observational analysis. Additionally, the degree of SDM was assessed by two observers. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to assess associations of communicated uncertainties, responses and the extent of SDM, with counselors' background characteristics. In total, twenty-nine counselors, including clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, physician assistants-in-training, residents and interns, participated of whom working experience varied between 0 and 25 years. Counselors expressed uncertainties mainly regarding scientific topics (94%) and on their own initiative (95%). Most expressions were framed directly (77%), e.g. We don't know, and were emotionally neutral (59%; without a positive/negative value). Counselors mainly responded to uncertainties of the simulated patient by explicitly referring to the uncertainty (69%), without providing space for further disclosure (66%). More experienced counselors provided less space to further disclose uncertainty (p <0.02), and clinical geneticists scored lower on SDM compared with other types of counselors (p <0.03). Our findings that counselors mainly communicate scientific uncertainties and use space-reducing responses imply that the way counselors address counselees' personal uncertainties and concerns during initial cancer genetic counseling is suboptimal

Nasal oxytocin administration does not influence eye gaze or perceived relationship of male volunteers with physicians in a simulated online consultation: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

The patient–physician relationship is a critical determinant of patient health outcomes. Verbal and non-verbal communication, such as eye gaze, are vital aspects of this bond. Neurobiological studies indicate that oxytocin may serve as a link between increased eye gaze and social bonding. Therefore, oxytocin signaling could serve as a key factor influencing eye gaze as well as the patient–physician relationsh ip. We aimed to test the effects of oxytocin on gaze to the eyes of the physician and the patient–physician relationship by conducting a randomized placebo-controlled crossover trial in healthy volunteers with intranasally administered oxytocin (with a prev iously effective single dose of 24 IU, EudraCT number 2018-004081-34). The eye gaze of 68 male volunteers was studied using eye tracking during a simulated video call consultation with a physician, who provided information about vaccination against the human papillomavirus. Relationship outcomes, including trust, satisfaction, and perceived physician communication style, were measured using questionnaires and corrected for possible confounds (social anxiety and attachment orientation). Additional secondary outcome measures for the effect of oxytocin were recall of information and pupil diameter and exploratory outcomes included mood and anxiety measures. Oxytocin did not affect the eye-tracking p arameters of volunteers’ gaze toward the eyes of the physician. Moreover, oxytocin did n ot affect the parameters of bonding between volunteers and the physician nor other secondary and exploratory outcomes in this setting. Bayesian hypothesis testing provided evidence for the absence of effects. These results contradict the notion that oxy tocin affects eye gaze patterns or bonding

‘We don’t know for sure’: discussion of uncertainty concerning multigene panel testing during initial cancer genetic consultations

Pre-test counseling about multigene panel testing involves many uncertainties. Ideally, counselees are informed about uncertainties in a way that enables them to make an informed decision about panel testing. It is presently unknown whether and how uncertainty is discussed during initial cancer genetic counseling. We therefore investigated whether and how counselors discuss and address uncertainty, and the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), and explored associations between counselors’ communication and their characteristics in consultations on panel testing for cancer. For this purpose, consultations of counselors discussing a multigene panel with a simulated patient were videotaped. Simulated patients represented a counselee who had had multiple cancer types, according to a script. Before and afterwards, counselors completed a survey. Counselors’ uncertainty expressions, initiating and the framing of expressions, and their verbal responses to scripted uncertainties of the simulated patient were coded by two researchers independently. Coding was done according to a pre-developed coding scheme using The Observer XT software for observational analysis. Additionally, the degree of SDM was assessed by two observers. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to assess associations of communicated uncertainties, responses and the extent of SDM, with counselors’ background characteristics. In total, twenty-nine counselors, including clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, physician assistants-in-training, residents and interns, participated of whom working experience varied between 0 and 25 years. Counselors expressed uncertainties mainly regarding scientific topics (94%) and on their own initiative (95%). Most expressions were framed directly (77%), e.g. We don’t know, and were emotionally neutral (59%; without a positive/negative value). Counselors mainly responded to uncertainties of the simulated patient by explicitly referring to the uncertainty (69%), without providing space for further disclosure (66%). More experienced counselors provided less space to further disclose uncertainty (p < 0.02), and clinical geneticists scored lower on SDM compared with o