Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25224315›Full record

Trial reportPatient education and counseling2014

Improving the quality of physician communication with rapid-throughput analysis and report cards.

Michael H Farrell, Stephanie A Christopher, Alison La Pean Kirschner, Sara J Roedl, Faith O O'Tool, Nadia Y Ahmad, Philip M Farrell

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Patient education and counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Michael H FarrellCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA; Aurora University of Wisconsin Medical Group, Center for Urban Population Health, Milwaukee, USA; Program in Genomics and Ethics, Center for Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, USA. Electronic address: michaelhfarrell@yahoo.com.
Stephanie A ChristopherCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Alison La Pean KirschnerCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA; Program in Genomics and Ethics, Center for Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Sara J RoedlCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Faith O O'ToolCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Nadia Y AhmadCenter for Patient Care and Outcomes Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Philip M FarrellDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, USA.

Funding

A Rapid-Throughput Feedback Intervention for Population-Scale Communication QualiRC1HL100819 · NHLBI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI FARRELL, MICHAEL HENRY · 2009 to 2010
$1000k
NHLBI NIH HHS RC1 HL100819
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveProblems with clinician-patient communication negatively impact newborn screening, genetics, and all of healthcare. Training programs teach communication, but educational methods are not feasible for entire populations of clinicians. To address this healthcare quality gap, we developed a Communication Quality Assurance intervention.

methodsChild health providers volunteered for a randomized controlled trial of assessment and a report card. Participants provided telephone counseling to a standardized parent regarding a newborn screening result showing heterozygous status for cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease. Our rapid-throughput timeline allows individualized feedback within a week. Two encounters were recorded (baseline and after a random sample received the report card) and abstracted for four groups of communication quality indicators.

results92 participants finished both counseling encounters within our rapid-throughput time limits. Participants randomized to receive the report card improved communication behaviors more than controls, including request for teach-back (p<0.01), opening behaviors (p=0.01), anticipate/validate emotion (p<0.001) and the ratio of explained to unexplained jargon words (p<0.03).

conclusionThe rapid-throughput report card is effective at improving specific communication behaviors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Communication can be taught, but this project shows how healthcare organizations can assure communication quality everywhere. Further implementation could improve newborn screening, genetics, and healthcare in general.

Indexed as

CommunicationCounselingProfessional-Family RelationsQuality ImprovementAdultAnemia, Sickle CellChildCystic FibrosisFemaleGenetic TestingHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedNeonatal ScreeningParentsCommunicationCystic fibrosisNeonatal screeningProfessional–patient relationsQuality indicators (health care)Sickle cell trait

Identifiers

PMID25224315
PMCPMC5279851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.