When the business of sharing treatment decisions is not the same as shared decision making: a discourse analysis of decision sharing in general practice

Maggie Robertson, James Moir, John Skelton, Jon Dowell, Sue Cowan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 18 Citations

Abstract

Although shared decision making (SDM) in general practice continues to be promoted as a highly desirable means of conducting consultations it is rarely observed in practice. The aim of this study is to identify the discursive features and conversational strategies particular to the negotiation and sharing of treatment decisions in order to understand why SDM is not yet embedded into routine practice. Consultations from Scottish general practices were examined using discourse analysis. Two themes were identified as key components for when the doctor and the patient were intent on sharing decisions: the generation of patient involvement using first-person pronouns, and successful and unsuccessful patient requesting practices. This article identifies a number of conversational activities found to be successful in supporting doctors’ agendas and reducing their responsibility for decisions made. Doctor’s use of ‘partnership talk’ was found to minimize resistance and worked to invite consensus rather than involvement. The information from this study provides new insight into the consultation process by identifying how treatment decisions are arrived at through highlighting the complexities involved. Notably, shared decision making does not happen with the ease implied by current models and appears to work to maintain a biomedical ‘GP as expert’ approach rather than one in which the patient is truly involved in partnership. We suggest that further research on the impact of conversational activities is likely to benefit our understanding of shared decision making and hence training in and the practice of SDM.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)78-95
Number of pages18
JournalHealth: an Interdiscliplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2011

Fingerprint

practice
decision making
decision
patient
discourse analysis
partnership
involvement
activity
routine
consensus
negotiation
resistance
generation
complexity
responsibility
human being
training
strategy
information
impact

Cite this

@article{1232511d897049ef9a1f43dc98d644e5,
title = "When the business of sharing treatment decisions is not the same as shared decision making: a discourse analysis of decision sharing in general practice",
abstract = "Although shared decision making (SDM) in general practice continues to be promoted as a highly desirable means of conducting consultations it is rarely observed in practice. The aim of this study is to identify the discursive features and conversational strategies particular to the negotiation and sharing of treatment decisions in order to understand why SDM is not yet embedded into routine practice. Consultations from Scottish general practices were examined using discourse analysis. Two themes were identified as key components for when the doctor and the patient were intent on sharing decisions: the generation of patient involvement using first-person pronouns, and successful and unsuccessful patient requesting practices. This article identifies a number of conversational activities found to be successful in supporting doctors’ agendas and reducing their responsibility for decisions made. Doctor’s use of ‘partnership talk’ was found to minimize resistance and worked to invite consensus rather than involvement. The information from this study provides new insight into the consultation process by identifying how treatment decisions are arrived at through highlighting the complexities involved. Notably, shared decision making does not happen with the ease implied by current models and appears to work to maintain a biomedical ‘GP as expert’ approach rather than one in which the patient is truly involved in partnership. We suggest that further research on the impact of conversational activities is likely to benefit our understanding of shared decision making and hence training in and the practice of SDM.",
author = "Maggie Robertson and James Moir and John Skelton and Jon Dowell and Sue Cowan",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1363459309360788",
volume = "15",
pages = "78--95",
journal = "Health: an Interdiscliplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine",
issn = "1461-7196",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When the business of sharing treatment decisions is not the same as shared decision making: a discourse analysis of decision sharing in general practice

AU - Robertson,Maggie

AU - Moir,James

AU - Skelton,John

AU - Dowell,Jon

AU - Cowan,Sue

PY - 2011/1

Y1 - 2011/1

N2 - Although shared decision making (SDM) in general practice continues to be promoted as a highly desirable means of conducting consultations it is rarely observed in practice. The aim of this study is to identify the discursive features and conversational strategies particular to the negotiation and sharing of treatment decisions in order to understand why SDM is not yet embedded into routine practice. Consultations from Scottish general practices were examined using discourse analysis. Two themes were identified as key components for when the doctor and the patient were intent on sharing decisions: the generation of patient involvement using first-person pronouns, and successful and unsuccessful patient requesting practices. This article identifies a number of conversational activities found to be successful in supporting doctors’ agendas and reducing their responsibility for decisions made. Doctor’s use of ‘partnership talk’ was found to minimize resistance and worked to invite consensus rather than involvement. The information from this study provides new insight into the consultation process by identifying how treatment decisions are arrived at through highlighting the complexities involved. Notably, shared decision making does not happen with the ease implied by current models and appears to work to maintain a biomedical ‘GP as expert’ approach rather than one in which the patient is truly involved in partnership. We suggest that further research on the impact of conversational activities is likely to benefit our understanding of shared decision making and hence training in and the practice of SDM.

AB - Although shared decision making (SDM) in general practice continues to be promoted as a highly desirable means of conducting consultations it is rarely observed in practice. The aim of this study is to identify the discursive features and conversational strategies particular to the negotiation and sharing of treatment decisions in order to understand why SDM is not yet embedded into routine practice. Consultations from Scottish general practices were examined using discourse analysis. Two themes were identified as key components for when the doctor and the patient were intent on sharing decisions: the generation of patient involvement using first-person pronouns, and successful and unsuccessful patient requesting practices. This article identifies a number of conversational activities found to be successful in supporting doctors’ agendas and reducing their responsibility for decisions made. Doctor’s use of ‘partnership talk’ was found to minimize resistance and worked to invite consensus rather than involvement. The information from this study provides new insight into the consultation process by identifying how treatment decisions are arrived at through highlighting the complexities involved. Notably, shared decision making does not happen with the ease implied by current models and appears to work to maintain a biomedical ‘GP as expert’ approach rather than one in which the patient is truly involved in partnership. We suggest that further research on the impact of conversational activities is likely to benefit our understanding of shared decision making and hence training in and the practice of SDM.

U2 - 10.1177/1363459309360788

DO - 10.1177/1363459309360788

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 78

EP - 95

JO - Health: an Interdiscliplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine

T2 - Health: an Interdiscliplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine

JF - Health: an Interdiscliplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine

SN - 1461-7196

IS - 1

ER -