What we talk about when we talk about depression: Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes

Alison Karasz, Christopher Dowrick, Richard Byng, Marta Buszewicz, Lucia Ferri, Tim C. Olde Hartman, Sandra Van Dulmen, Evelyn Van Weel-Baumgarten, Joanne Reeve

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Efforts to address depression in primary care settings have focused on the introduction of care guidelines emphasising pharmacological treatment. To date, physician adherence remains low. Little is known of the types of information exchange or other negotiations in doctor-patient consultations about depression that influence physician decisionmaking about treatment. Aim: The study sought to understand conversational influences on physician decisionmaking about treatment for depression. Design: A secondary analysis of consultation data collected in other studies. Using amaximumvariation sampling strategy, 30 transcripts of primary care consultations about distress or depression were selected fromdatasets collected in three countries. Transcripts were analysed to discover factors associated with prescription ofmedication. Method: The study employed two qualitative analysis strategies: amicro-analysis approach, which examines how conversation partners shape the dialogue towards pragmatic goals; and a narrative analysis approach of the problempresentation. Results: Patients communicated their conceptual representations of distress at the outset of each consultation. Concepts of depression were communicated through the narrative formof the problempresentation. Three types of narratives were identified: those emphasising symptoms, those emphasising life situations, andmixed narratives. Physician decisionmaking regarding medication treatment was strongly associated with the formof the patient's narrative. Physicians made few efforts to persuade patients to accept biomedical attributions or treatments. Conclusion: Results of the study provide insight into why adherence to depression guidelines remains low. Data indicate that patient agendas drive the 'action' in consultations about depression. Physicians appear to be guided by common-sense decision-making algorithms emphasising patients' views and preferences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalBritish Journal of General Practice
Volume62
Issue number594
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Depression
Physicians
Referral and Consultation
Primary Health Care
Guidelines
Therapeutics
Patient Preference
Negotiating
Prescriptions
Decision Making
Pharmacology

Keywords

  • Conceptualmodels
  • Decisionmaking
  • Depression
  • Discourse analysis
  • Doctor-patient relations
  • Illness representation
  • Narrative analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Family Practice

Cite this

What we talk about when we talk about depression : Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes. / Karasz, Alison; Dowrick, Christopher; Byng, Richard; Buszewicz, Marta; Ferri, Lucia; Olde Hartman, Tim C.; Van Dulmen, Sandra; Van Weel-Baumgarten, Evelyn; Reeve, Joanne.

In: British Journal of General Practice, Vol. 62, No. 594, 01.2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Karasz, A, Dowrick, C, Byng, R, Buszewicz, M, Ferri, L, Olde Hartman, TC, Van Dulmen, S, Van Weel-Baumgarten, E & Reeve, J 2012, 'What we talk about when we talk about depression: Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes', British Journal of General Practice, vol. 62, no. 594. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp12X616373
Karasz, Alison ; Dowrick, Christopher ; Byng, Richard ; Buszewicz, Marta ; Ferri, Lucia ; Olde Hartman, Tim C. ; Van Dulmen, Sandra ; Van Weel-Baumgarten, Evelyn ; Reeve, Joanne. / What we talk about when we talk about depression : Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes. In: British Journal of General Practice. 2012 ; Vol. 62, No. 594.
@article{92d0aed787c9456db0047eb4ae85f962,
title = "What we talk about when we talk about depression: Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes",
abstract = "Background: Efforts to address depression in primary care settings have focused on the introduction of care guidelines emphasising pharmacological treatment. To date, physician adherence remains low. Little is known of the types of information exchange or other negotiations in doctor-patient consultations about depression that influence physician decisionmaking about treatment. Aim: The study sought to understand conversational influences on physician decisionmaking about treatment for depression. Design: A secondary analysis of consultation data collected in other studies. Using amaximumvariation sampling strategy, 30 transcripts of primary care consultations about distress or depression were selected fromdatasets collected in three countries. Transcripts were analysed to discover factors associated with prescription ofmedication. Method: The study employed two qualitative analysis strategies: amicro-analysis approach, which examines how conversation partners shape the dialogue towards pragmatic goals; and a narrative analysis approach of the problempresentation. Results: Patients communicated their conceptual representations of distress at the outset of each consultation. Concepts of depression were communicated through the narrative formof the problempresentation. Three types of narratives were identified: those emphasising symptoms, those emphasising life situations, andmixed narratives. Physician decisionmaking regarding medication treatment was strongly associated with the formof the patient's narrative. Physicians made few efforts to persuade patients to accept biomedical attributions or treatments. Conclusion: Results of the study provide insight into why adherence to depression guidelines remains low. Data indicate that patient agendas drive the 'action' in consultations about depression. Physicians appear to be guided by common-sense decision-making algorithms emphasising patients' views and preferences.",
keywords = "Conceptualmodels, Decisionmaking, Depression, Discourse analysis, Doctor-patient relations, Illness representation, Narrative analysis",
author = "Alison Karasz and Christopher Dowrick and Richard Byng and Marta Buszewicz and Lucia Ferri and {Olde Hartman}, {Tim C.} and {Van Dulmen}, Sandra and {Van Weel-Baumgarten}, Evelyn and Joanne Reeve",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
doi = "10.3399/bjgp12X616373",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "62",
journal = "British Journal of General Practice",
issn = "0960-1643",
publisher = "Royal College of General Practitioners",
number = "594",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What we talk about when we talk about depression

T2 - Doctor-patient conversations and treatment decision outcomes

AU - Karasz, Alison

AU - Dowrick, Christopher

AU - Byng, Richard

AU - Buszewicz, Marta

AU - Ferri, Lucia

AU - Olde Hartman, Tim C.

AU - Van Dulmen, Sandra

AU - Van Weel-Baumgarten, Evelyn

AU - Reeve, Joanne

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - Background: Efforts to address depression in primary care settings have focused on the introduction of care guidelines emphasising pharmacological treatment. To date, physician adherence remains low. Little is known of the types of information exchange or other negotiations in doctor-patient consultations about depression that influence physician decisionmaking about treatment. Aim: The study sought to understand conversational influences on physician decisionmaking about treatment for depression. Design: A secondary analysis of consultation data collected in other studies. Using amaximumvariation sampling strategy, 30 transcripts of primary care consultations about distress or depression were selected fromdatasets collected in three countries. Transcripts were analysed to discover factors associated with prescription ofmedication. Method: The study employed two qualitative analysis strategies: amicro-analysis approach, which examines how conversation partners shape the dialogue towards pragmatic goals; and a narrative analysis approach of the problempresentation. Results: Patients communicated their conceptual representations of distress at the outset of each consultation. Concepts of depression were communicated through the narrative formof the problempresentation. Three types of narratives were identified: those emphasising symptoms, those emphasising life situations, andmixed narratives. Physician decisionmaking regarding medication treatment was strongly associated with the formof the patient's narrative. Physicians made few efforts to persuade patients to accept biomedical attributions or treatments. Conclusion: Results of the study provide insight into why adherence to depression guidelines remains low. Data indicate that patient agendas drive the 'action' in consultations about depression. Physicians appear to be guided by common-sense decision-making algorithms emphasising patients' views and preferences.

AB - Background: Efforts to address depression in primary care settings have focused on the introduction of care guidelines emphasising pharmacological treatment. To date, physician adherence remains low. Little is known of the types of information exchange or other negotiations in doctor-patient consultations about depression that influence physician decisionmaking about treatment. Aim: The study sought to understand conversational influences on physician decisionmaking about treatment for depression. Design: A secondary analysis of consultation data collected in other studies. Using amaximumvariation sampling strategy, 30 transcripts of primary care consultations about distress or depression were selected fromdatasets collected in three countries. Transcripts were analysed to discover factors associated with prescription ofmedication. Method: The study employed two qualitative analysis strategies: amicro-analysis approach, which examines how conversation partners shape the dialogue towards pragmatic goals; and a narrative analysis approach of the problempresentation. Results: Patients communicated their conceptual representations of distress at the outset of each consultation. Concepts of depression were communicated through the narrative formof the problempresentation. Three types of narratives were identified: those emphasising symptoms, those emphasising life situations, andmixed narratives. Physician decisionmaking regarding medication treatment was strongly associated with the formof the patient's narrative. Physicians made few efforts to persuade patients to accept biomedical attributions or treatments. Conclusion: Results of the study provide insight into why adherence to depression guidelines remains low. Data indicate that patient agendas drive the 'action' in consultations about depression. Physicians appear to be guided by common-sense decision-making algorithms emphasising patients' views and preferences.

KW - Conceptualmodels

KW - Decisionmaking

KW - Depression

KW - Discourse analysis

KW - Doctor-patient relations

KW - Illness representation

KW - Narrative analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84855657928&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84855657928&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3399/bjgp12X616373

DO - 10.3399/bjgp12X616373

M3 - Article

C2 - 22520683

AN - SCOPUS:84855657928

VL - 62

JO - British Journal of General Practice

JF - British Journal of General Practice

SN - 0960-1643

IS - 594

ER -