Implementing Scenarios as an Evaluation Method of the Patient-Physician Interaction in Decision Aids
Decision aids are being used in the exam room to assist physicians with diagnosing. Past research on computer-based decision aids examined perceived physician capabilities and degree of liability, and their impact on the patient-physician interaction. However, no one has contrasted the use of physical aids (physician’s desk reference) with computerized aids on these characteristics. In this study, participants were given a scenario in which they took on the role of the patient and were asked to rate the physician’s capabilities and degree of liability given a negative outcome. There were no significant differences between the aid types (computer, physical, or no) employed on physician capabilities or liability. However, we suggest that scenarios can effectively be used to assess the impact of decision aids on the physician-patient interaction.
Keywordsscenario decision aid patient-physician interaction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Bieber, C., Muller, K.G., Nicolai, J., Hartmann, M., Eich, W.: How does your doctor talk with you? Preliminary validation of a brief patient self-report questionnaire on the quality of physician-patient interaction. Journal of Clinical Psychological Medical Settings 17(2), 125–136 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Chen, Y., Ngo, V., Harrison, S., Duong, V.: Unpacking exam-room computing: Negotiating computer-use in patient-physician interactions, CHI, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 3343–3352 (2011)Google Scholar
- 6.Cruickshank, P.J.: Computers in medicine: patient’s attitudes. The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 34(259), 77–80 (1984)Google Scholar
- 10.Larkin, K., Kelliher, A.: Designing flexible EMR systems for recording and summarizing doctor-patient interactions, CHI, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1609–1614 (2011)Google Scholar
- 13.Miller, R.A.: Computer-assisted diagnostic decision support: history, challenges, and possible paths forward. Advances In Health Science Education 14(S1), 89–106 (2009)Google Scholar
- 14.Pennachio, D.L.: Clinical guidelines sword or shield? Medical Economics 81(12), 22–24 (2004)Google Scholar
- 16.Potter, A.R.: Computers in general practice: the patient’s voice. Journal of Royal of General Practioners 31(232), 683–685 (1981)Google Scholar
- 20.Roter, D.L., Frankel, R.M., Hall, J.A., Sluyter, D.: The expression of emotion through nonverbal behavior in medical visits: Mechanisms and outcomes. Journal of General Internal Medicine 34(S1), S28–S34 (2006)Google Scholar
- 23.Shaffer, V.A., Probst, C.A., Merkle, E.C., Arkes, H.R., Meadow, M.A.: Why do patients derogate physicians who use a computer-based diagnostic support system? Medical Decision Making 33(1), 1–11 (2012)Google Scholar
- 24.Sharp, Rogers, Preece: Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction, 2nd edn., pp. 505–506, 558. Wiley, NJ (2007)Google Scholar
- 25.Tamblyn, R.M., Klass, D.K., Schanbl, G.K., Kopelow, M.L.: Factors associated with the accuracy of standardized patient presentation. Academic Medicine 65(S9), 55–56 (1990)Google Scholar