Review article
Does patient coaching make a difference in patient-physician communication during specialist consultations? A systematic review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2016.12.029Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Patient coaching seems a promising intervention to improve communication.

  • Effective seems multiple coaching encounters to prepare and rehearse questions.

  • Also effective seems evaluating the consultation and reflecting upon it.

  • Audio recording during the consultation seems helpful.

  • The evidence on effective elements in patient coaching is limited.

Abstract

Objective

To systematically review the literature on the effectiveness of a patient coach intervention on patient − physician communication in specialists consultations.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane, PsycInfo, Cinahl and Embase were searched until November 2015. Included were papers describing interventions directed at adult outpatients in secondary care with a variety of somatic diseases. Outcomes had to be measured in communication effectivity from a patient’s perspective.

Results

Seventeen publications met the inclusion criteria (involving 3787 patients), describing 13 unique interventions. Most interventions were single one-on-one sessions taking between 20 and 40 min before consultation. Research quality in ten studies was high. These studies showed significant improvement on immediate, intermediate and long term patient − physician communication.

Conclusion

We found limited evidence suggesting an improvement of patient − physician communication by having multiple patient coaching encounters during which questions are prepared and rehearsed and consultations are evaluated and reflected upon, sometimes supported by audio recording the consultation.

Practice implications

The results of this review contribute to the (re-)design of an effective model for patient coaching, a profile and training approach of patient coaches. Future research should aim at determining which patients will benefit most from coaching interventions.

Introduction

Research shows that patients want to be heard and to be taken seriously in consultations with physicians [1]. Patients with a chronic illness are increasingly expected to self-manage their disease, which implies being involved in treatment decisions as well. In most cases, treatment is initiated by a medical specialist, therefore a patient’s ability to communicate effectively during these consultations is essential [2], [3], [4]. Patients need to be aware of and skilled to disclose relevant personal information about preferences, values and concerns [5]. Several factors reduce the likelihood that patients get the communicative approach they want and need during medical consultations, even though healthcare providers are doing their best to serve the patient’s needs [6].

Barriers to communication have been reported in a systematic review on shared decision making [7]. Thirty three papers concerned studies in secondary care. Patients in these studies were diagnosed with various diseases, like cancer, cardiac diseases, diabetes, osteoporosis, hernia or asthma. Reported barriers related to how the healthcare system is organized and the interaction between patient and physician during consultation [7].

The complex hospital environment with full waiting rooms, difficult navigation through departments and clinic, dealing with many different healthcare professionals, and time constraints imposed by busy healthcare professionals, challenges communication during clinical consultations [8], [9].

In the interactional context barriers relate to the power imbalance between patient and physician. This involves, from a patient’s perspective, presumptions about their role and undervalued expertise in relation to the physician’s knowledge [7]. Furthermore, the communication style of individual healthcare professionals may hinder effective communication with patients, for example by being hasty or by communicating in an excessively technical and instrumental way [8]. Patients also perceive several barriers within themselves, for example being overwhelmed by emotions, counterproductive values and beliefs [8], and lacking conversational skills or cognitive abilities, to be an active participant during healthcare visits [10].

The influence of barriers declines as patients become more experienced in their treatment trajectory. Van Bruinessen et al. identified a pattern of three states in patients communicating with healthcare professionals: 1) being overwhelmed and passive, 2) being pro-active and 3) being self-motivated, proficient and empowered. In line with the ‘conscious competence learning’- model by Maslow, moving towards a next state in this trajectory might be facilitated by increasing patients’ awareness on the role patients can play and the benefits of active participation [11], and additionally acquire the skills to communicate about their values, concerns and context in a participatory manner. Although most chronically ill patients move to subsequent states as time evolves after diagnosis, some patients remain in the first state of being unconsciously incompetent [8] during their treatment trajectory.

To increase the number of patients that move from the first state to the second or even third, or accelerate this transition Van Bruinessen et al. suggested interventions should focus on creating awareness about the role patients can play during consultations and on training their communication skills [8]. Joseph-Williams et al. suggested to use alternative ways to prepare a patient for the shared decision making encounters: in addition to decision aids supporting the patient’s ability to participate in the shared decision making process, focus should also be on how to handle the power imbalance between patient and physician [7].

Standardized communication and educational strategies to achieve patient empowerment are challenging, because patients’ support needs are complex (influenced by health literacy level, social and cultural differences), can change over time and vary between contexts [12]. The identification in clinical practice of patients who will benefit most from coaching is challenging as well and requires further investigation.

Personal attention may be best suited to adapt to changing needs and circumstances. After all, human connection is fundamental in person centered patient care, and patients require human connection to feel respected and equal [13]. In a study among patients visiting medical specialists in Dutch hospitals, 16.6% of patients stated that they would appreciate a personal coach to help them prepare, execute, and evaluate medical consultations. Patients expressed the need for support to inform the provider about their preferred position in the process of medical decision-making, and help them to articulate their most important values and concerns at different stages during the treatment trajectory [14].

Previous reviews investigated such patient coaching interventions in different healthcare settings [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]. The majority of these studies however, were limited to interventions provided before consultations [20], [23], to patients with cancer [18], or directed only at practitioners [22]. The effects of personal, patient directed interventions for patients consulting a medical specialist, aiming to improve communication, and its effective components have not yet been systematically reviewed. This review therefore aims to increase understanding in these interventions and their effect on communication during consultation.

We performed a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines [24] to address the following research questions:

  • (1)

    Which patient coaching interventions have been developed and studied with respect to effectiveness on communication?

  • (2)

    How are these interventions provided (what elements are included, at what moment related to the consultation, how often and by whom)?

  • (3)

    Do coaching interventions significantly influence patient communication in specialist consultations?

Answers to these questions can be used to develop new or adapt existing patient coaching interventions.

Section snippets

Search strategy

We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Cochrane, PsycInfo, Cinahl and Embase until November 2015. The search strategy was developed by the first author (IA), with librarian support, primarily for PubMed (Appendix A) and adjusted accordingly for the other databases.

The search was divided into three aspects to find relevant references on (1) patient coaching interventions (Intervention) to improve (2) patient-physician communication (Outcome) with medical specialists, in (3)

Included studies on patient coaching interventions.

Seventeen articles were included, describing thirteen unique interventions on a total of 3787 patients. Three interventions were investigated in multiple studies: Expanding Patient Involvement in Care (EPIC) [32], [33], [34], Tailored Education and Counselling (TEC) [35], [36] and Consultation Planning (CP) [37], [38].

Research quality in ten studies was high. Control conditions varied in the included studies. Most studies compared a single intervention to a control group [28], [29], [32], [33],

Discussion

This systematic review of studies on personal coaching interventions directed at improving patient-physician communication during specialist consultations showed that personal support is able to improve patient communication (1) immediately, i.e. during consultation, (2) intermediately, i.e. as perceived after consultation, and (3) at the long term follow-up, i.e. the effect was sustainable. Even though these outcomes are promising, it was not possible to be conclusive about the effectiveness

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Acknowledgements

We thank Harm-Wouter Snippe for the provision of a very useful digital tool to select references for inclusion based on title and abstract; Elmie Peters and Linda Schoonmade for their support in creating the proper search strategy; Fuusje de Graaff, Nicolien Kromme and Antoine Bakx for their advice on previous versions of this paper.

References (63)

  • M.Y. Smith et al.

    Impact of a brief intervention on patient communication and barriers to pain management: results from a randomized controlled trial

    Patient Educ. Couns.

    (2010)
  • L.E. Boulware et al.

    Effectiveness of educational and social worker interventions to activate patients' discussion and pursuit of preemptive living donor kidney transplantation: a randomized controlled trial

    Am. J. Kidney Dis.

    (2013)
  • M.H. Mishel et al.

    Managing uncertainty about treatment decision making in early stage prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial

    Patient Educ. Couns.

    (2009)
  • P. Craig et al.

    Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance

    Int. J. Nurs. Stud.

    (2013)
  • S.C. Hayes et al.

    Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes

    Behav. Res. Ther.

    (2006)
  • M. Tsulukidze et al.

    Providing recording of clinical consultation to patients – a highly valued but underutilized intervention: a scoping review

    Patient Educ. Couns.

    (2014)
  • M. Heijmans et al.

    Functional, communicative and critical health literacy of chronic disease patients and their importance for self-management

    Patient Educ. Couns.

    (2015)
  • M.A. Mazzi et al.

    What do people appreciate in physicians' communication: an international study with focus groups using videotaped medical consultations

    Health Expect.

    (2015)
  • R.L. Kruse et al.

    Communication during patient-provider encounters regarding diabetes self-management

    Fam. Med.

    (2013)
  • T. Jowsey et al.

    Effective communication is crucial to self-management: the experiences of immigrants to Australia living with diabetes

    Chronic Illn.

    (2011)
  • I.R. van Bruinessen et al.

    Barriers and facilitators to effective communication experienced by patients with malignant lymphoma at all stages after diagnosis

    Psychooncology

    (2013)
  • D. Feldman-Stewart et al.

    A conceptual framework for patient-professional communication: an application to the cancer context

    Psychooncology

    (2005)
  • A. Robinson et al.

    Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools

    Qual. Health Care

    (2001)
  • K. Thorarinsdottir et al.

    Patients' perspectives on person-centred participation in healthcare: a framework analysis

    Nurs. Ethics

    (2014)
  • I. Henselmans et al.

    Participation of chronic patients in medical consultations: patients’ perceived efficacy, barriers and interest in support

    Health Expect.

    (2015)
  • P.M. Kane et al.

    The gap between policy and practice: a systematic review of patient-centred care interventions in chronic heart failure

    Heart Fail. Rev.

    (2015)
  • F. Legare et al.

    Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals

    Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.

    (2014)
  • S. Kopke et al.

    Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis

    Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.

    (2014)
  • I. Henselmans et al.

    Enhancing patient participation in oncology consultations: a best evidence synthesis of patient-targeted interventions

    Psychooncology

    (2013)
  • J.K. Rao et al.

    Communication interventions make a difference in conversations between physicians and patients: a systematic review of the evidence (Structured abstract)

    Med. Care

    (2007)
  • P. Kinnersley et al.

    Interventions before consultations to help patients address their information needs by encouraging question asking: systematic review

    BMJ

    (2008)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text