Communication & Medicine, Vol 11, No 2 (2014)

Key components of effective collaborative goal setting in the chronic care encounter

Sarah Bigi
Issued Date: 17 Aug 2015

Abstract


Collaborative goal setting in patient–provider communication with chronic patients is the phase in which – after collecting the data regarding the patient’s health – it is necessary to make a decision regarding the best therapy and behaviors the patient should adopt until the next encounter. Although it is considered a pivotal phase of shared decision making, there remain a few open questions regarding its components and its efficacy: What are the factors that improve or impede agreement on treatment goals and strategies?; What are the ‘success conditions’ of collaborative goal setting?; How can physicians effectively help patients make their preferences explicit and then co-construct with them informed preferences to help them reach their therapeutic goals? Using the theoretical framework of dialogue types, an approach developed in the field of Argumentation Theory, it will be possible to formulate hypotheses on the ‘success conditions’ and effects on patient commitment of collaborative goal setting.

Download Media

PDF (Price: £17.50 )

DOI: 10.1558/cam.v11i2.21600

References


Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T. and McBurney, P. (2005) Multi-agent argumentation for edemocracy. In M. P. Gleizes, G. A. Kaminka, A. Nowé, S. Ossowski, K. Tuyls and K. Verbeeck (eds) Proceedings of the Third European Workshop on Multi-Agent Systems, 35–46. Brussels: Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten.


Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T. and Walton, D. (2012) Distinctive features of persuasion and deliberation dialogues. Argument and Computation 4 (2): 105–
127.


Austin, J. L. (1962) How To Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.


Beach, W. A. and Dixson, C. N. (2001) Revealing moments: Formulating understandings of adverse experiences in a health appraisal interview. Social Science and Medicine 52: 25–44.


Bigi, S. (2012) Contextual constraints on argumentation: The case of the medical encounter. In F. H. van Eemeren and B. Garssen (eds) Exploring Argumentative Contexts, 289–303. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


Bigi, S. and Labrie, N. (in preparation) Criteria for the reconstruction and analysis of doctors’ argumentation in the context of chronic care, accepted for presentation at the European Conference on Argumentation, 9–12 June 2015, Lisbon.


Brennan, P. F. and Strombom, I. (1998) Improving health care by understanding patient preferences: The role of computer technology. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 5 (3): 257–262.


Charles, C., Gafni, A. and Whelan, T. (1997) Shared decision making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Science and Medicine 44 (5): 681–692.


Charles, C., Gafni, A. and Whelan, T. (1999) Decision-making in the physician–patient encounter: Revisiting the shared treatment decision making model. Social Science and Medicine 49 (5): 651–
661.


Coupland, J., Robinson, J. and Coupland, N. (1994) Frame negotiation in doctor–elderly patient consultations. Discourse and Society 5 (1): 89–124.


Elwyn, G., Edwards, A., Kinnersley, P. and Grol, R. (2000) Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices. British Journal of General Practice 50 (460): 892–897.


Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Thomson, R., Joseph-Williams, N., Lloyd, A., Kinnersley, P., Cording, E., Tomson, D., Dodd, C., Rollnick, S., Edwards, A. and Barry, M. (2012) Shared decision making: A model for clinical practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine 27 (10): 1361–1367.


Emmons, K. and Rollnick, S. (2001) Motivational interviewing in health care settings: Opportunities and limitations. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 20 (1): 68–74.


Entwistle, V. A., Watt, I. S., Gilhooly. K., Bugge, C., Haites, N. and Walker, A. E. (2004) Assessing patients’ participation and quality of decision making: Insights from a study of routine practice in diverse settings. Patient Education and Counseling 55 (1): 105–113.


Epstein, R. and Gramling, R. E. (2013) What is shared in shared decision making? Complex decisions when the evidence is unclear. Medical Care Research and Review 70 (1): Supplement, 94S–112S.


Epstein, R. and Street, R. L. (2011) Shared mind: Communication, decision making, and autonomy in serious illness. Annals of Family Medicine 9 (5): 454–461.


Heisler, M., Bouknight, R. R., Hayward, R. A., Smith, D. M. and Kerr E. A. (2002) The relative importance of physician communication, participatory decision making, and patient understanding in diabetes self-management. Journal of General Internal Medicine 17 (4): 243–252.


Heisler, M., Vijan, S., Anderson, R. M., Ubel, P. A., Bernstein, S. J. and Hofer, T. P. (2003) When do patients and their physicians agree on diabetes treatment goals and strategies, and what difference does it make? Journal of General Internal Medicine 18 (11): 893–902.


Heritage, J. and Maynard, D. (2006) Problems and prospects in the study of clinician–patient interaction: 30 years of research. Annual Review of Sociology 32: 351–374.


Heritage, J., Robinson, J. D., Elliot, M. N., Beckett, M. and Wilkes, M. (2007) Reducing patients’ unmet concerns in primary care. Journal of General Internal Medicine 22 (10): 1429–1433.


Jenicek, M. (2009) Fallacy-Free Reasoning in Medicine: Improving Communication and Decision Making in Research and Practice. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association Press.


Jenicek, M. and Hitchcock, D. L. (2005) Evidence-Based Practice Logic and Critical Thinking in Medicine. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association Press.


Labrie, N. (2012) Strategic maneuvering in treatment decision making discussions: Two cases in point. Argumentation 26 (2): 171–199.


Lafata, J. E., Morris, H. L., Dobie, E., Heisler, M., Werner, R. M. and Dumenci, L. (2013) Patient-reported use of collaborative goal setting and glycemic control among patients with diabetes. Patient Education and Counseling 92 (1): 94–99.


Langford, A. T., Sawyer, D. R., Gioimo, S., Brownson, C. A. and O’Toole, M. L. (2007) Patient-centered goal setting as a tool to improve diabetes self-management. Diabetes Educator 33 (Supplement 6): 139S–144S.


Macagno, F. (forthcoming) Practical reasoning and values. In A. Rocci (ed.) Practical Reasoning and Argumentation. Berlin: Springer.


McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D. and Parsons, S. (2007) The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22 (1): 95–132.


McBurney, P. and Parsons, S. (2001) Chance discovery using dialectical argumentation. In T. Terano, T. Nishida, A. Namatame, S. Tsumoto, Y. Ohsawa and T. Washio (eds) New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2253: 414–424. Berlin: Springer Verlag.


Naik, A. D., Kallen, M. A., Walder, A. and Street, R. L. (2008) Improving hypertension control in diabetes mellitus: The effects of collaborative and proactive health communication. Circulation 117 (11): 1361–1368.


Pilgram, R. (2012) Reasonableness of a doctor’s argument by authority. Journal of Argumentation in Context 1 (1): 33–50.


Politi, M. C. and Street, R. L. (2011) The importance of communication in collaborative decision making: Facilitating shared mind and the management of uncertainty. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 17 (4): 579–584.


Roter, D. and Hall, J. (2006) Doctors Talking with Patients/Patients Talking with Doctors. Westport, CT: Praeger.


Rubinelli, S. (2013) Rational versus unreasonable persuasion in doctor–patient communication: A normative account. Patient Education and Counseling 92 (3): 296–301.


Street, R. L. (2013) How clinician–patient communication contributes to health improvement: Modeling pathways from talk to outcome. Patient Education and Counseling 92 (3): 286–291.


Street, R. L., Elwyn, G. and Epstein, R. (2012) Patient preferences and health care outcomes: An ecological perspective. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 12 (2): 167–180.


Street, R. L., Piziak, V. K., Carpentier, W. S., Herzog, J., Hejl, J., Skinner, G. and McLellan, L. (1993) Provider–patient communication and metabolic control. Diabetes Care 16 (5): 714–721.


Taylor, K. (2009) Paternalism, participation and partnership – The evolution of patient centeredness in the consultation. Patient Education and Counseling 74: 150–155.


Toniolo, A., Cerutti, F., Oren, N. and Norman, T. J. (2013) Argument schemes and provenance to support collaborative intelligence analysis. In L. Berntzen and P. Dini (eds) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Advanced Collaborative Networks, Systems and Applications, 51–54. Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates.


Von Korff, M., Gruman, J., Schaefer, J., Curry, S. J. and Wagner, E. H. (1997) Collaborative management of chronic illness. Annals of Internal Medicine 127 (12): 1097–1102.


Wagner E. H. (1998) Chronic disease management: What will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Effective Clinical Practice 1 (1): 2–4.


Walton, D. (2005) Practical reasoning and proposing: tools for e-democracy. In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2005, 113–114. Amsterdam: IOS Press.


Walton, D. (2006) How to make and defend a proposal in a deliberation dialogue. Artificial Intelligence and Law 14 (3): 177–239.


Walton, D. (2010) Types of dialogues and burdens of proof. In P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin and G. R. Simari (eds) Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, 13–24. Amsterdam: IOS Press.


Walton, D., Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., Wyner, A. and Cartwright, D. (2010) Argumentation in the framework of deliberation dialogue. In C. Bjola and M. Kornprobst (eds) Arguing Global Governance, 201–230. London: Routledge.


Walton, D. and Krabbe, E. (1995) Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.


Walton, D. and Reed, C. (2002) Argumentation schemes and defeasible inferences. In G. Carenini, F. Grasso and C. Reed (eds) Working Notes of the ECAI 2002 Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument: 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Lyon (France) http://cgi.csc.liv.ac.uk/~floriana/CMNA/WaltonReed.pdf


Walton, D., Toniolo, A. and Norman, T. (2014) Missing phases of deliberation dialogue for real applications. Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. Berlin: Springer.


Wirtz, V., Cribb, A. and Barber, N. (2006) Patient–doctor decision making about treatment within the consultation – A critical analysis of models. Social Science and Medicine 62 (1): 116–124.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.





Equinox Publishing Ltd - 415 The Workstation 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)114 221-0285 - Email: info@equinoxpub.com

Privacy Policy