TY - JOUR
T1 - Companions' dilemma of intervention when they mediate between patients with intellectual disabilities and health staff
AU - Antaki, Charles
AU - Chinn, Deborah
N1 - Funding Information:
Deborah Chinn has been funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Postdoctoral Fellowship (grant number: PDF-2013-06-060). The article presents independent research funded by NIHR. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health. No restrictions on free access to or publication of the research data has been imposed by the funding body.
Funding Information:
Deborah Chinn has been funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Postdoctoral Fellowship (grant number: PDF-2013-06-060 ). The article presents independent research funded by NIHR. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health. No restrictions on free access to or publication of the research data has been imposed by the funding body.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2019/11
Y1 - 2019/11
N2 - Objective: We analyse, for the first time, how companions intervene in the answers that an adult patient with intellectual disabilities gives to their medical practitioner in primary care. Methods: Video records of 25 health-check consultations in a large multi-ethnic city in the UK were analysed with the qualitative methods of Conversation Analysis. Results: We found that companions' interventions in patients' answers fell along a gradient of low to high entitlement, from mere hinting to outright direct take-over. Conclusion: Companions have to manage the dilemma of displaying information which is the proper domain of the patient: encroachment on the patient's epistemic rights versus the needs of the medical practitioner. Practice Implications: Practitioners may need to check the patients themselves when their companions intervene at the most assertive end of the gradient of help.
AB - Objective: We analyse, for the first time, how companions intervene in the answers that an adult patient with intellectual disabilities gives to their medical practitioner in primary care. Methods: Video records of 25 health-check consultations in a large multi-ethnic city in the UK were analysed with the qualitative methods of Conversation Analysis. Results: We found that companions' interventions in patients' answers fell along a gradient of low to high entitlement, from mere hinting to outright direct take-over. Conclusion: Companions have to manage the dilemma of displaying information which is the proper domain of the patient: encroachment on the patient's epistemic rights versus the needs of the medical practitioner. Practice Implications: Practitioners may need to check the patients themselves when their companions intervene at the most assertive end of the gradient of help.
KW - Companions
KW - Conversation analysis
KW - Health-check interviews
KW - Intellectual disability
KW - Medical consultation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85066796428
U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2019.05.020
DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2019.05.020
M3 - Article
C2 - 31178164
AN - SCOPUS:85066796428
SN - 0738-3991
VL - 102
SP - 2024
EP - 2030
JO - Patient Education and Counseling
JF - Patient Education and Counseling
IS - 11
ER -