Cover not available
Article published In:
Argumentation and Patient Centered Care
Edited by Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Roosmaryn Pilgram and Nanon Labrie
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 7:2] 2018
► pp. 120–137

The potential of argumentation theory in enhancing patient-centered care in breaking bad news encounters

| Tel Aviv University, Israel
| Tel Aviv University, Israel

Recent research on medical communication discusses the role of argumentation in building physician-patient consensus to enhance shared decision-making. This paper focuses on the potential of using argumentation to establish the preliminary step of shared understanding of the diagnosis. This understanding is important in helping patients accept the disease and in increasing their involvement in care. We conducted an in-depth analysis of an observation of a medical encounter, triangulated with interviews with all participants, to illustrate how the lack of clear information and argumentation concerning the disease hindered the patient’s understanding and acceptance of it. This in turn led to difficulties in building a trusting relationship and in reaching treatment decisions. We discuss how using argumentation focused on the disease can allow a fruitful patient-centered discussion about the medical condition and treatment options.

Keywords: argumentation theory, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, breaking bad news, treatment decisions
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Method
    • Study population and background information
    • Data collection, design, and instruments
    • Ethics
    • Analysis
  • Findings
    • The encounter
  • Discussion
    • Can argumentation theory and PCC work together?
    • Practical implications, future needs, and limitations
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 12 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18023.kar
References

References

Charles, Cathy, Amiram Gafni, and Tim Whelan
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):681–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H.
2010 Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Extending the Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst
1984 Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Dordrecht: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
2016 Argumentation: Analysis and Evaluation. Taylor & Francis. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elwyn, Glyn et al.
2014 “Collaborative Deliberation: A Model for Patient Care.” Patient Education and Counseling 97 (2):158–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Ronald M. and Richard L. Street
2011 “Shared Mind: Communication, Decision Making, and Autonomy in Serious Illness.” The Annals of Family Medicine 9 (5):454–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit
2006 “The Experiencing of Breaking and Receiving Bad News on Chronic Illness during Adolescence: An Insider’s Perspective of Adolescents, Parents and Physicians.” (doctoral dissertation) University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel. (In Hebrew).Google Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit and Zvi Eisikovits
2009 “Physician as Partner or Salesman? Shared Decision-Making in Real-Time Encounters.” Social Science and Medicine 69 (1):1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit, Perla Werner, Judith Aharon-Peretz, and Shmuel Eidelman
2007 “Dilemmas in the (un)veiling of the Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease: Walking an Ethical and Professional Tight Rope.” Patient Education and Counseling 67 (3):307–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit, Perla Werner, Galit Neufeld-Kroszynski, and Shmuel Eidelman
2012 “Are You Talking to Me?! An Exploration of the Triadic Physician-Patient-Companion Communication within Memory Clinics Encounters.” Patient Education and Counseling 88 (3):381–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labrie, Nanon H. M. and Peter J. Schulz
2015 “Exploring the Relationships between Participatory Decision-Making, Visit Duration, and General Practitioners’ Provision of Argumentation to Support Their Medical Advice: Results from a Content Analysis.” Patient Education and Counseling 98 (5):572–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labrie, Nanon and Peter J. Schulz
2014 “Does Argumentation Matter? A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Argumentation in Doctor–Patient Communication.” Health Communication 29 (10):996–1008. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leplege, Alain et al.
2007 “Person-Centredness: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives.” Disability and Rehabilitation 29 (20–21):1555–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mead, Nicola and Peter Bower
2000 “Patient-Centredness: A Conceptual Framework and Review of the Empirical Literature.” Social Science and Medicine 51 (7):1087–1110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meitar, Dafna, Orit Karnieli-Miller, and Shmuel Eidelman
2009 “The Impact of Senior Medical Students’ Personal Difficulties on Their Communication Patterns in Breaking Bad News.” Academic Medicine 84 (11):1582–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moustakas, Clark
1994 Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rivera, Francisco Javier Uribe and Elizabeth Artmann
2015 “Argumentação E Comunicação Médico-Paciente: Comparando Os Enfoques Da Pragma-Dialética de Toulmin E a Sociolinguística Americana.” Cadernos de Saúde Pública 31 (12):2577–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara
2013 “Rational versus Unreasonable Persuasion in Doctor–patient Communication : A Normative Account.” Patient Education and Counseling 92 (3):296–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara and Peter J. Schulz
2006 “ ‘Let Me Tell You Why!’. When Argumentation in Doctor–Patient Interaction Makes a Difference.” Argumentation 20 (3):353–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara and Claudia Zanini
2012 “Teaching Argumentation Theory to Doctors: Why and What.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 1 (1):66–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salmon, Peter
2015 “Argumentation and Persuasion in Patient-Centred Communication.” Patient Education and Counseling, 98 (5):543–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schulz, Peter J. and Sara Rubinelli
2006 “Healthy Arguments for Literacy in Health.” Paper presented at the AAAI Spring Symposium on Argumentation for Consumers of Healthcare, Palo Alto, CA, March 2006.
Seawright, Jason and John Gerring
2008 “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (2):294–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin
1990 Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Tojek, Tina M., Mark A. Lumley, Michelle Corlis, Steven Ondersma, and Vasundhara Tolia
2002 “Maternal Correlates of Health Status in Adolescents with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 52 (3):173–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wirtz, Veronika, Alan Cribb, and Nick Barber
2006 “Patient–doctor Decision-Making about Treatment within the consultation – A Critical Analysis of Models.” Social Science and Medicine 62 (1):116–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zanini, Claudia A. and Sara Rubinelli
2012 “Using Argumentation Theory to Identify the Challenges of Shared Decision-Making When the Doctor and the Patient Have a Difference of Opinion.” Journal of Public Health Research 1 (2): 165–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zanini, Claudia, Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, Fabiola Atzeni, Manuela Di Franco, and Sara Rubinelli
2015 “Building Bridges between Doctors and Patients: The Design and Pilot Evaluation of a Training Session in Argumentation for Chronic Pain Experts.” BMC Medical Education 151:89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Abdalazim Dafallah, Mumen, Esraa Ahmed Ragab, Mahmoud Hussien Salih, Wail Nuri Osman, Roaa Omer Mohammed, Mugtaba Osman, Mohamed H. Taha & Mohamed H. Ahmed
2020. Breaking bad news: Awareness and practice among Sudanese doctors. AIMS Public Health 7:4 ► pp. 758 ff. DOI logo
Akkermans, Aranka, Sanne Prins, Amber S. Spijkers, Jean Wagemans, Nanon H. M. Labrie, Dick L. Willems, Marcus J. Schultz, Thomas G. V. Cherpanath, Job B. M. van Woensel, Marc van Heerde, Anton H. van Kaam, Moniek van de Loo, Anne Stiggelbout, Ellen M. A. Smets & Mirjam A. de Vos
2023. Argumentation in end-of-life conversations with families in Dutch intensive care units: a qualitative observational study. Intensive Care Medicine 49:4 ► pp. 421 ff. DOI logo
Akkermans, Aranka, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Nanon Labrie, Inge Henselmans & Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
2019. Chapter 13. Characteristics of argumentation in consultations about palliative systemic treatment for advanced cancer. In Argumentation in Actual Practice [Argumentation in Context, 17], ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo
Brummernhenrich, Benjamin & Regina Jucks
2019. “Get the shot, now!” Disentangling content-related and social cues in physician–patient communication. Health Psychology Open 6:1 ► pp. 205510291983305 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.