• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
    • Medicine
    • Emergency Medicine
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
    • Medicine
    • Emergency Medicine
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of West Midlands Evidence RepositoryCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesPublication DateSubjectsPublication TypesJournalPublisherThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesPublication DateSubjectsPublication TypesJournalPublisherProfilesView

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutPolicies Privacy NoticeBlack Country Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustCoventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS TrustDudley Group NHS Foundation TrustGeorge Eliot Hospital NHS TrustSandwell and West Birmingham NHS TrustSouth Warwickshire University NHS Foundation TrustUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation TrustUniversity Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS TrustWalsall Healthcare NHS Trust

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Caring in the silences: why physicians and surgeons do not discuss emergency care and treatment planning with their patients - an analysis of hospital-based ethnographic case studies in England.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Author
    Eli, Karin
    Hawkes, Claire
    Perkins, Gavin D
    Slowther, Anne-Marie
    Griffiths, Frances
    Publication date
    2022-03-07
    Subject
    Emergency medicine
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Background: Despite increasing emphasis on integrating emergency care and treatment planning (ECTP) into routine medical practice, clinicians continue to delay or avoid ECTP conversations with patients. However, little is known about the clinical logics underlying barriers to ECTP conversations. Objective: This study aims to develop an ethnographic account of how and why clinicians defer and avoid ECTP conversations, and how they rationalise these decisions as they happen. Design: A multisited ethnographic study. Setting: Medical, orthopaedic and surgical wards in hospitals within four acute National Health Service trusts in England. Participants: Thirty-four doctors were formally observed and 32 formally interviewed. Following an ethnographic case study approach, six cases were selected for in-depth analysis. Analysis: Fieldnote data were triangulated with interview data, to develop a 'thick description' of each case. Using a conceptual framework of care, the analysis highlighted the clinical logics underlying these cases. Results: The deferral or avoidance of ECTP conversations was driven by concerns over caring well, with clinicians attempting to optimise both medical and bedside practice. Conducting an ECTP conversation carefully meant attending to patients' and relatives' emotions and committing sufficient time for an in-depth discussion. However, conversation plans were often disrupted by issues related to timing and time constraints, leading doctors to defer these conversations, sometimes indefinitely. Additionally, whereas surgeons and geriatricians deferred conversations because they did not have the time to offer detailed discussions, emergency and acute medicine clinicians deferred conversations because the high-turnover ward environment, combined with patients' acute conditions, meant triaging conversations to those most in need. Conclusion: Overcoming barriers to ECTP conversations is not simply a matter of enhancing training or hospital policies, but of promoting good conversational practices that take into account the affordances of hospital time and space, as well as clinicians' understandings of caring well.
    Citation
    Eli K, Hawkes C, Perkins GD, Slowther AM, Griffiths F. Caring in the silences: why physicians and surgeons do not discuss emergency care and treatment planning with their patients - an analysis of hospital-based ethnographic case studies in England. BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 7;12(3):e046189. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046189
    Type
    Article
    Other
    Handle
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/4803
    Additional Links
    http://bmjopen.bmj.com/
    DOI
    10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046189
    PMID
    35256437
    Journal
    BMJ Open
    Publisher
    BMJ Publishing Group
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046189
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Emergency Medicine

    entitlement

    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2025)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.