How do patients’ preferences and values shape treatment discussions?

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Values talk in medical encounters: How do patients’ treatment preferences shape discussions with doctors and nurses?

  • IRAS ID

    249154

  • Contact name

    Charles Baker

  • Contact email

    N0427936@my.ntu.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Nottingham Trent University

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    2 years, 0 months, 14 days

  • Research summary

    This research project aims to support doctors, nurses, patients and their families, to have helpful conversations about treatment decisions for prostate cancer. Today there is an expectation that doctors and nurses should be as open as possible with information about illnesses and treatments, and that they should make treatment choices with patients, rather than for them.

    This is called ‘shared decision-making’. In recommending treatment, doctors and nurses are expected to understand a patient’s own point of view about side effects and treatment more generally. However, this is not straightforward. It can be difficult for patients to think about how side effects might affect them in the future, and difficult to explain their point of view in a busy hospital outpatient clinic with limited time.

    Some men end up regretting their choice of treatment for Prostate Cancer. We want to see if the number of people who regret their treatment can be reduced by supporting better treatment decision-making conversations.


    Our study
    We want to analyse examples of treatment decision-making conversations between doctors, nurses and patients so we can investigate what is helpful in these conversations, and what might be unhelpful.

    This means we need to ask men and their families for permission to record their appointments with their doctor or nurse. The recording will be made by the doctor or nurse themselves, using a small dictaphone. After the recording has been made we remove any information about the patient or practitioner from the recording that could identify patients or practitioners and it is then passed on to a researcher who looks closely at the recording and compares it to others. They will use a very structured method for analysing conversations called Discursive Psychology to identify patterns and make recommendations.

  • REC name

    Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    18/YH/0350

  • Date of REC Opinion

    21 Aug 2018

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion