Behaviorally Defined Patient-Centered Communication—A Narrative Review of the Literature

Robert C. Smith,Francesca C. Dwamena,Madhusudan Grover,John Coffey,Richard M. Frankel
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1496-5
IF: 5.7
2010-09-08
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Abstract:BACKGROUNDTouted by some as reflecting a better medical model and cited by the influential IOM report in 2000 as one of the six domains of quality care, patient-centered medicine has yet to fully establish its scientific attributes or to become mainstream. One proposed reason is failure to behaviorally define what the term ‘patient-centered’ actually means.OBJECTIVES(1) To identify patient-centered articles among all reported randomized controlled trials (RCT); (2) to identify those with specific behaviorally defined interventions; (3) to identify commonalities among the behavioral definitions; and (4) to evaluate the relationship of the well-defined RCTs to patient outcomes.DATA SOURCESMedline from April 2010 to 1975.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONSRCTs having any specific, behaviorally defined patient-centered skill(s) in an intervention with some patient outcome involving real adult patients and providers in real clinical situations.APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODSCritical appraisal via narrative review.RESULTSThe prevalence of any mention of patient-centeredness among 327,219 RCTs was 0.50% (1,475 studies), from which we identified only 13 studies (0.90%) where there were behaviorally-defined patient-centered skills in an intervention. Although there were too few studies to make clinical recommendations, we identified common features of the behavioral definitions used: all went well beyond identifying individual skills. Rather, skills were grouped, prioritized, and sequenced by virtually all, often describing a stepwise patient-centered approach to, variously, gather data, address emotions, or inform and motivate.LIMITATIONSThe inherent subjectivity of our method for identifying behaviorally-defined studies could under- or over-represent truly replicable such studies considerably. Also, studies were few and very heterogeneous with interventions of widely differing intensity and foci.CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONSRCTs identified as patient-centered were rare, and <1% of these were behaviorally defined and, therefore, possibly replicable. There were many common behavioral definitions in the studies reported, and these can guide us in identifying agreed-upon patient-centered interventions, the immediate next-step in advancing the field.
medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services
What problem does this paper attempt to address?