Document Type: Original Articles

Authors

1 Health Policy Research Center (HPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Science, Shiraz, Iran; Department of Sociology and Social Planning, College of Economics, Management, and Social Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

2 Health Policy Research Center (HPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Science, Shiraz, Iran;

3 Department of Sociology and Social Planning, College of Economics, Management, and Social Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

4 Department of Internal Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Science, Shiraz, Iran;

5 Department of Clinical Psychology, Islamic Azad University Fars Science and Research Branch, Marvdasht, Iran

Abstract

Background: Many of health system services are done in clinical counseling. A patient’s expectation of clinical consultation and physician office visits is to obtain diagnostic-remedial results, while such an expectation can be fulfilled only through an active relationship between the doctor and the patient. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of doctor- patient interaction in an educational clinic in southern Iran. Methods: This is a conversation analysis based on critical approach. So, 33 clinical consultations were analyzed critically. Results: Results showed that paternalistic model is the overall pattern in consultations. This leads to limitation of the patients’ opportunity to participate in their diagnosis and treatment. Powers’ asymmetrical relations lead to conditions in which physicians determine the clinical counseling process. Also, physicians determine the subject of consultation in the counseling period. In this situation, the patients’ concerns were ignored. This ignorance leads to the patients’ suppression in problematic situations. The main point is that the clinical counseling occurs in one general contract that is unwritten but has been known for the two sides of interaction. Conclusion: Clinical counseling can be an active consultation when it included the symmetrical distribution of power and the patient has an active participation in the consultation. Therefore, the new patient-centered approaches can be an appropriate model for access to a type of consultation based on symmetrical power distribution between physician and patient.

Keywords

  1. Cordella M. The Dynamic Consultation A discourse
  2. analytical study of doctor–patient relation. Amsterdam:
  3. John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2004.
  4. Parsons T. The Social System. England: Routledge;
  5. Turner, BH. Introduction. In The Social System.
  6. England: Routledge; 1991.
  7. Armstrong, D. Bodies of Knowledge/Knowledge of
  8. Bodies. In Jones, C. and Porter, R. (eds) Reassessing
  9. Foucault. Power, medicine and the body, London:
  10. Routledge;1994:17-27.
  11. Driver, F. Bodies in Space: Foucault’s Account of
  12. Disciplinary Power. Bodies. In Jones, C. and Porter,
  13. R. (eds) Reassessing Foucault. Power, medicine and the
  14. body. London: Routledge; 1994: 113- 131.
  15. Foucault M. The Birth of the Clinic. An Archeology
  16. of Medical Perception. Sheridan AM (translate). UK:
  17. Tavistock Publications Limited; 1973.
  18. McGowen, R. Power and Humanity, or Foucault Among
  19. the Historians. In Jones, C. and Porter, R. Reassessing
  20. Foucault. Power, medicine and the body. London:
  21. Routledg; 1994: 91-112.
  22. Habermas, J. Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2.
  23. Lifeworld and System. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1978.
  24. Scambler, G. Habermas a nd t he Power of M edical
  25. Experties. In Scambler, G. (eds) Medical Sociology.
  26. Major Themes in Health and Social Welfare. USA:
  27. Routledge; 2005: 138-162.
  28. Scambler, G. and Britten, N. System, lifeworld and
  29. doctor–patient interaction Issues of trust in a changing
  30. world. In Scambler, G. (eds) Habermas, critical theory
  31. and Health. London: Routledge; 2001: 45-67.
  32. Powers, P. The Philosophical Foundations of Foucaultian
  33. Discourse Analysis. Critical Approaches to Discourse
  34. Analysis across Disciplines 2007; 1(2): 18-34.
  35. Barry ChA, Stevenson FA, Britten N, Bradley CP.
  36. Giving voice to the lifeworld. More humane, more
  37. effective medical care? A qualitative study of doctor–
  38. patient relation in general practice. Soc Sci Med 2001;
  39. : 487–505.
  40. Fairclough N. Discourse and Social Changes. USA:
  41. Polity Press; 1992.
  42. Kralova P. Power Relations in doctor- patient relation.
  43. Kamenice: Masaryk University; 2012 [cited: 2013 Aug
  44. . available from: http://is.muni.cz/th/361459/ff_b/
  45. Thesis.pdf.
  46. Islam G, Zyphur M. Ways of interacting: The
  47. standardization of relation in medical training. Hum
  48. Relat 2007; 6(5): 769-92.
  49. Mishler, GE. The Discourse of Medicine: dialectics
  50. of medical interviews. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex
  51. Publishing Company; 1984.
  52. Heritage and myard
  53. American Sociological Association. Code of Ethics
  54. and Policies and Procedures of the ASA Committee
  55. on Professional Ethics. 1997 [updated 2008 May 10;
  56. cited: 2014 Jan 1]. Available from: http://www.asanet.
  57. org/images/asa/docs/pdf/Ethics%20Code.pdf
  58. Wells K. Narrative Inquiry. USA: Oxford University
  59. Press; 2011.
  60. Gee, JP. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis, Theory
  61. and Method. Third Edition. New York: Routledge; 2010.
  62. Emanuel JE, Emanuel LL. Four Model of the Physicianpatient
  63. relationship. Am J Med Sci 1992; 267(16): 5-13.
  64. Merriam- webster online dictionary. Marginalize.
  65. [cited: 2014 22 May] Available from: http://www.
  66. merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marginalize
  67. McKinney, J. PTSD Patients Marginalized by the
  68. Current Healthcare System. 2012. Available from:
  69. http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/johnmckinney/
  70. blog/2012/11/ptsd-patients-marginalized-currenthealthcare-
  71. system-11122012.
  72. Atkinson, P. M edical Talk a nd M edical Work.
  73. London: S age p ub; 1995.
  74. Bensing, J. Bridging the gap. The separate worlds
  75. of Evidence-based medicine and p atient-centered
  76. medicine. Patient Educ Couns 2000; 39: 17-25.
  77. Forman, H. Nursing Leadership For Patient-Centered
  78. Care. Authenticity Presence Intuition Expertise. New
  79. York: Springer Publishing Company; 2011.
  80. Mengel, MB. The Systemic Patient-Centered Method.
  81. Introduction to Clinical Skills : A Patient-centered
  82. Textbook. Mengel, MB, Scott, AF (eds). Plenum Press;
  83. Watson, J., Frampton, SB. Human Interactions and
  84. Relationship – centered Caring. Putting Patients
  85. First. Best Practices in Patient-Centered Care. Second
  86. Edition. Editors Frampton, SB. and Charmel PA; 2009.
  87. Pendleton D, Schofield Th, Tate P, Havelock P. The New
  88. Consultation Developing doctor–patient communication.
  89. New York: Oxford University press; 2003.
  90. Sadati AK, Iman MT, Lankarani KB. Medical
  91. Paraclinical Standards, Political Economy of Clinic,
  92. and Patients’ Clinical Dependency; A Critical
  93. Conversation Analysis of Clinical Counseling in South
  94. of Iran. IJCBNM 2014; 2(3): 157-68.