Trust and Questioning in the Acute Care Setting
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Fostering Appropriate Questioning and Well-placed Trust in the Acute Care Setting: Developing an Ethical Framework and Practical Policy.
IRAS ID
166182
Contact name
Zoe Fritz
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Warwick
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 10 months, 18 days
Research summary
The acute setting raises particular challenges for the patient-doctor relationship. Doctors form new relationships with patients, and gain significant amounts of information from them, in a very short period of time. The severity of the illnesses mean the margins for error in clinical decision-making are small, and patients may have reduced capacity or desire for engaging in shared decision-making.
Structured two-way communication ( for example sharing parts of the medical notes) might be one way of encouraging appropriate questioning and facilitating well-placed trust. Medical records have been shared in other clinical environments, but never in the acute setting in the UK. There are potential risks in sharing all medical records which need to be explored. These include doctors reducing the amount that they record in order to preserve the confidentiality of close ones, or to shield patients from unlikely but possible differential diagnoses. In this study, up to 60 doctors and patients will be interviewed about their experiences of information they have shared or that they wish they had access to, and their views of what improves trust and questioning. Using data from the interviews, a questionnaire will be developed and distributed to doctors and patients to determine more generalisable views on what the ideal minimum amount of information is that should be routinely shared in an acute care setting. Understanding patient and clinician experiences and views on this could lead to improved clinical and ethical practice.REC name
East of England - Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
15/EE/0457
Date of REC Opinion
3 Mar 2016
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion