The interaction between physician and patient communication behaviors in Japanese cancer consultations and the influence of personal and consultation characteristics
Introduction
Over the past few decades, the physician–patient relationship has been transforming with the changing medical environment, such as increases in chronic illnesses and the rise of consumerism [1], [2]. It has also attracted the attention of researchers to the communication between physician and patient in the medical consultation. Communication is a major component of medical encounters and a key to establishing a favorable physician–patient relationship [3], [4], [5], [6]. Various studies have demonstrated that physician–patient communication has a significant influence on the outcome of patient care, including patient satisfaction, compliance to treatment, recall and understanding of medical information, coping with disease, and even actual state of health [7], [8], [9], [10], [11].
With growing interest in physician–patient communication, several observation instruments, so-called interaction analysis systems (IAS), have been developed for the systematic analysis of physician–patient interaction in the consultation [12], [13]. They have made a great contribution to revealing the content and structure of the interaction in the medical consultation. The Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) is one of the most widely used IAS in Western countries, and has some notable features. It has been specifically developed for the assessment of physician–patient interaction, and captures both types of important behaviors in the interaction, namely instrumental and affective behaviors. Coding is carried out directly from audiotapes rather than transcripts, which allows evaluating nonverbal as well as verbal communication. Moreover, it has been examined on its validity and reliability in Western countries [14], [15], [16], [17], and rated favorably in a comparison study [18].
Until recently, most of the studies on physician–patient interaction have been conducted in primary care settings, and there are relatively few studies that specifically examined the interactions in cancer consultations [14], [16], [19]. In the case of life-threatening illness, such as cancer, which requires continuing care and complicated decision making, the physician–patient relationship may become even more critical in the treatment process, since patients are likely to experience greater uncertainty and anxiety [20], [21]. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the physician–patient interaction specifically in cancer consultations.
Further, it is often indicated that social and cultural background underlying physician–patient relationship is considerably different between Western and Asian countries. Historically, the physician–patient relationship in Japan has been often described as more hierarchical and paternalistic compared to Western countries [22], [23]. It has been a tradition in Japan that physicians do not discuss much about treatment choices and do not explain the details of procedures to patients [24]. Feldman has pointed out that less is overtly communicated during a typical medical visit in Japan than in the United States but less may need to be said in a society where trust and dependency more strongly influence social interaction [25]. Recently, however, following the changes in the physician–patient relationship in Western countries, a similar transformation has been noted in Japan. Various concepts and models developed in Western countries have been introduced, including “informed consent”, “decision making”, and “patient autonomy”. Yet, there have been few systematic studies that objectively evaluate the contents of physician–patient communication in Japan. It is necessary, as well as of much interest from a cross-cultural viewpoint, to explore physician–patient communication in the social and cultural context in Japan.
The purpose of this study is to explore the interaction between physician and patient communications and the influence of patient and consultation characteristics in Japanese cancer consultations.
Physician–patient interactions are “processes of personal and mutual influence that unfold according to the characteristics of the individuals and to interactive processes related to how interactants adapt their communication to one another” [26]. That is, communications of physician and patient are influenced by the communications of their counterpart as well as by their personal characteristics.
It has been indicated that patient information giving and question asking are associated with their age, education, and anxiety, and that partnership building statements by physicians increase patients information giving and question asking [26], [27]. Also, based on their findings that the length of interaction, patient’s diagnosis, and purpose of visit had an important impact on patient information seeking behaviors, Beisecker suggested that such situational characteristics of the consultation must be considered in the analysis of physician–patient interaction [27].
Similarly, it has been reported that physician communication varies with patient characteristics, such as age, sex, and preference for participation [28]. Also, Labrecque reported that physicians provided more information when patients were accompanied by family members [29]. It has been indicated that patient question asking and emotional expressions are positively related to information giving by physicians [30]. Further, more negative emotional expressions by patients lead to more positive socio-emotional statements by physicians [26].
Based on the findings of previous studies in Western countries, we hypothesized that physician and patient communication patterns vary with the characteristics of patient and consultation, as well as the communication pattern of the counterpart. Specifically, (1) patient information giving is positively associated with physician’s partnership building communication; (2) patient information seeking is positively associated with physician’s partnership building communication; (3) patient emotional expression is positively associated with physician’s affective communication; (4) physician information giving is positively associated with patient information seeking behavior and emotional expression; and (5) physician emotional responsiveness is positively associated with patient emotional expression.
Section snippets
Sample
The original data were collected for the study on the relationship between physician communication style and patient anxiety level in cancer consultations [31]. The subjects of this study were 200 outpatients who visited the National Cancer Center Hospital in Tokyo during 3-month survey period. Patients were eligible for the study if they had been diagnosed with cancer, had seen their physician before, and their cancer was not too debilitating for them to participate in the study. Details of
Inter-coder reliability of the RIAS
The median difference of the total number of utterances per consultation identified by two coders was 5 (0–23). The identification of each segment per consultation was 88.2% (76.1–100.0%) congruent between two coders on average.
In order to examine inter-coder reliability of categorization, we calculated the Spearman correlation coefficients between two coders for the categories with a frequency >2 per consultation. The 13 out of 38 physician categories and 12 out of 34 patient categories met
Discussion
This study applied the RIAS to the analysis of physician–patient interactions in Japanese cancer consultations. Inter-coder reliability of coding was examined in terms of the congruence in identifying and categorizing the utterances, which seemed to be acceptably high. Also, inter-coder reliability of global affect ratings for physician was on an adequate level.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) 11410042 on “Practitioner–Patient Relationship and Patient’s Autonomy” from Japanese Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture. We are grateful to Dr. Hideki Hashimoto for his helpful suggestions and comments, and to Dr. Debra Roter for her instruction concerning the RIAS and valuable advice. Special thanks are due to Dr. L.M.L. Ong and Dr. Sarah Ford for providing the information on the clusters of the RIAS used
References (46)
- et al.
Doctor–patient communication: a review of the literature
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1995) What is a successful doctor–patient interview? A study of interactions and outcomes
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1984)- et al.
What patients like about their medical care and how often they are asked: a meta-analysis of the satisfaction literature
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1988) - et al.
Patient–physician communication assessment instruments: 1986–1996 in review
Pat. Educ. Couns.
(1998) - et al.
Doctor–patient interactions in oncology
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1996) - et al.
Doctor–patient communication and cancer patients quality of life and satisfaction
Pat. Educ. Couns.
(2000) - et al.
The significance of the doctor–patient relationship coping with cancer
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1984) Communicative styles and adaptations in physician–parent consultations
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1992)- et al.
The impact of family presence on the physician–cancer patient interaction
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1991) - et al.
Psychosocial problem disclosure by primary care patients
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1999)
The dynamics of change: cancer patients preferences for information, involvement and support
Ann. Oncol.
Regaining the initiative: forging a new model of the patient–physician relationship
JAMA
Four models of the physician–patient relationship
JAMA
Health outcomes and communication research
Hlth. Commun.
Physicians communication style and patient satisfaction
J. Hlth. Soc. Behav.
Outcome-based doctor–patient interaction analysis. Part II. Identifying effective provider and patient behavior
Med. Care
Assessing the effect of physician–patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease
Med. Care.
Relations between physicians behaviors and analogue patients satisfaction, recall and impressions
Med. Care.
Systematic analysis of clinician–patient interactions: a critique of recent approaches with suggestions for future research
Med. Care
Satisfaction, gender, and communication in medical visits
Med. Care
The roter interaction analysis system (RIAS) in oncological consultations: psychometric properties
Psycho-oncology
Communication patterns of primary care physicians
JAMA
Cited by (42)
Patients’ perceptions of patient-centered communication with healthcare providers and associated factors in Japan – The INFORM Study 2020
2024, Patient Education and CounselingThe Behavioural Display of Compassion in Radiation Therapy: Purpose, Meaning and Interpretation
2020, Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation SciencesCitation Excerpt :The relationship permits the MRT to accompany the patient through their radiation therapy experience.71 However, it is important there is interconnectivity with both parties to create a shared partnership and mutual understanding.64,66,70,73,76,81,82 Dual engagement shapes the dynamic,83,84 creating an encounter that enables those individuals to relate to one another and share experiences73 supporting the formation of embodied connection.
Communication in oncology: Now we train - but how well?
2016, Annals of OncologyCitation Excerpt :Therefore, results of such studies do not always fare well in detailed critical analysis. Ishikawa et al. [29], for example, observed that 80% of utterances identified by the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) related to physicians' emotional responsiveness (a cluster consisting of the categories showing concern, empathy, legitimization, reassurance, and encouragement) were (stereotypical) statements of reassurance and encouragement such as ‘there is no need to worry’ or ‘you will be all right’. While it might be difficult to assess the Gestalt of a given communication encounter, we do know the barriers that hamper physician–patient encounters.
Association of patient-provider communication domains with lung cancer treatment
2014, Journal of Thoracic OncologyCitation Excerpt :Specifically, providing information about treatment side effects, extent of the disease, prognosis, and chances of cure can help meet patients’ informational needs.22,23 In addition, patient satisfaction is influenced by physicians’ ability to exhibit friendly and compassionate behavior,24 and a warm communication style is important in making patients feel comfortable asking questions.25 Prior studies have shown that empathic communication is important for reducing anxiety and fear, providing support and reassurance, improving patient satisfaction, and adherence to physician recommendations.26–29
Working alliance in communication skills training for oncology clinicians: A controlled trial
2013, Patient Education and CounselingCitation Excerpt :According to the conceptual framework of working alliance and the patient-centered approach, we hypothesized that the two relational functions – building a relationship and partnership building – were the communicational behaviors directly related to the working alliance. The reliability and validity of the RIAS are well established [49,51,52]. In our study, inter-rater reliability, based on 20 cases (9%), revealed to be excellent with a mean intraclass coefficient ICC(2,1) = .952 (range = .916–.994).
An evidence base for patient-centered cancer care: A meta-analysis of studies of observed communication between cancer specialists and their patients
2009, Patient Education and Counseling