Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17144910›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2006

Physicians' communication with patients about adherence to HIV medication in San Francisco and Copenhagen: a qualitative study using Grounded Theory.

Toke S Barfod, Frederick M Hecht, Cecilie Rubow, Jan Gerstoft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Developing a patient-reported outcome measure for HIV care on perceived barriers to antiretroviral adherence: assessing the needs of HIV clinicians through qualitative analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Toke S BarfodDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. Toke.barfod@dadlnet.dk
Frederick M Hecht
Cecilie Rubow
Jan Gerstoft

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor adherence is the main barrier to the effectiveness of HIV medication. The objective of this study was to explore and conceptualize patterns and difficulties in physicians' work with patients' adherence to HIV medication. No previous studies on this subject have directly observed physicians' behavior.

methodsThis is a qualitative, cross-sectional study. We used a Grounded Theory approach to let the main issues in physicians' work with patients' adherence emerge without preconceiving the focus of the study. We included physicians from HIV clinics in San Francisco, U.S.A. as well as from Copenhagen, Denmark. Physicians were observed during their clinical work and subsequently interviewed with a semi-structured interview guide. Notes on observations and transcribed interviews were analyzed with NVivo software.

resultsWe enrolled 16 physicians from San Francisco and 18 from Copenhagen. When we discovered that physicians and patients seldom discussed adherence issues in depth, we made adherence communication and its barriers the focus of the study. The main patterns in physicians' communication with patients about adherence were similar in both settings. An important barrier to in-depth adherence communication was that some physicians felt it was awkward to explore the possibility of non-adherence if there were no objective signs of treatment failure, because patients could feel "accused." To overcome this awkwardness, some physicians consciously tried to "de-shame" patients regarding non-adherence. However, a recurring theme was that physicians often suspected non-adherence even when patients did not admit to have missed any doses, and physicians had difficulties handling this low believability of patient statements. We here develop a simple four-step, three-factor model of physicians' adherence communication. The four steps are: deciding whether to ask about adherence or not, pre-questioning preparations, phrasing the question, and responding to the patient's answer. The three factors/determinants are: physicians' perceptions of adherence, awkwardness, and believability.

conclusionCommunication difficulties were a main barrier in physicians' work with patients' adherence to HIV medication. The proposed model of physicians' communication with patients about adherence--and the identification of awkwardness and believability as key issues--may aid thinking on the subject for use in clinical practice and future research.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedAnti-HIV AgentsAntiretroviral Therapy, Highly ActiveCounselingCross-Sectional StudiesDenmarkFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMedicineMiddle AgedAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID17144910
PMCPMC1702356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.