Search

Diversity is defined as differences between people, including age, gender, ethnicity, culture, religion, political affiliation, socio-economic status, education level, gender identity, sexual orientation, and physical, emotional, and mental abilities.1 Differentiating within such categories is natural but limits the ability to work with and learn through diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective—To identify communication patterns used by veterinarians during clinical appointments in companion animal practice. Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study. Sample Population—A random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets. Procedure—For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments (3 wellness appointments and 3 appointments related to a health problem) were videotaped. The Roter interaction analysis system was used to analyze the resulting 300 videotapes, and cluster analysis was used to identify veterinarian communication patterns. Results—175 (58%) appointments were classified as having a biomedical communication pattern, and 125 (42%) were classified as having a biolifestyle-social communication pattern. None were classified as having a consumerist communication pattern. Twenty-three (46%) veterinarians were classified as using a predominantly biomedical communication pattern, 19 (38%) were classified as using a mixed communication pattern, and 8 (16%) were classified as using a predominantly biolifestyle-social communication pattern. Pattern use was related to the type of appointment. Overall, 103 (69%) wellness appointments were classified as biolifestyle-social and 127 (85%) problem appointments were classified as biomedical. Appointments with a biomedical communication pattern (mean, 11.98 minutes) were significantly longer than appointments with a biolifestyle-social communication pattern (10.43 minutes). Median relationship-centered care score (ie, the ratio of client-centered talk to veterinarian-centered talk) was significantly higher during appointments with a biolifestyle-social communication pattern (1.10) than during appointments with a biomedical communication pattern (0.40). Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that veterinarians in companion animal practice use 2 distinct patterns of communication. Communication pattern was associated with duration of visit, type of appointment, and relationship-centeredness. Recognition of these communication patterns has implications for veterinary training and client and patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective-To identify specific components of veterinarian-client-patient communication during clinical appointments in companion animal practice. Design-Cross-sectional descriptive study. Sample Population-A random sample of 50 companion animal practitioners in southern Ontario and a convenience sample of 300 clients and their pets. Procedure-For each practitioner, 6 clinical appointments (3 wellness appointments and 3 appointments related to a health problem) were videotaped, and the Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS) was used to analyze the resulting 300 videotapes. Statements made during each appointment were classified by means of a communication framework reflecting the 4 essential tasks of the appointment (ie, data gathering, education and counseling, relationship building, and activation and partnership). Results-57% of the veterinarians contacted (50/87) and 99% of the clients contacted agreed to participate in the study. Mean duration of the appointments was 13 minutes. Typically, veterinarians contributed 62% of the total conversation and clients contributed 38%. Fifty-four percent of the veterinarian interaction was with the client, and 8% was with the pet. Data gathering constituted 9% of the veterinarian-to-client communication and was primarily accomplished through closed-ended questioning; 48% of veterinarian-to-client communication involved client education and counseling, 30% involved relationship building, and 7% involved activation and partnership (the remaining 6% constituted orientation). Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Results suggest that the RIAS was a reliable method of assessing the structure, process, and content of veterinarian client-patient communication and that some veterinarians do not use all the tools needed for effective communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is limited information in the veterinary literature on veterinarian-client-patient communication, and what is available is predominantly based on expert opinion and anecdotal information, not peer-reviewed scientific studies. In contrast, the human medical communication literature contains a large number of empirical studies. Thus, a review of research of physician-patient interactions is a logical starting place to determine what steps veterinary researchers, educators, and practitioners could take to investigate and address veterinarian-client-patient interactions. The purpose of this report were to summarize recent advances in human medical communication research and education, link findings in human medical communication research to veterinary medicine, and provide a rationale for development of communication research and education programs in veterinary medical schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the need to negotiating a mutually accepted treatment plan with veterinarian clients and encourage their participation while increasing their buy-in. It mentions that helping clients decide on a financial limit provides a point of negotiation for the best treatment options within their budget. It also mentions that the need to acknowledge the client's difficulties, strain, and financial stressors to open the discussion and form a nonjudgmental atmosphere.

The article focuses on how veterinary practice can discuss the financial condition of their business to team members. Topics include the use of communication tools to promote constructive conversations about money matters, the need to give honest answers to the team's questions, and provide clear and concise information to the team.

The article offers information on various factors that should be considered related to diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of disease of pets. Topics discussed include the role of clients for animal health, several tips that should be followed to avoid frustrations and misinformation related to veterinary medicine such as listening to client's perspectives, asking permission, and usage of partnering language, and the importance of empowerment of animal caregivers.

OBJECTIVE To describe client and veterinarian perceptions of client-centeredness during euthanasia discussions and assess agreement between measures of these perceptions. DESIGN Descriptive study. SAMPLE Stratified random sample of 32 companion animal veterinarians in southern Ontario. PROCEDURES 2 case scenarios (a geriatric dog with worsening arthritis and a cat with inappropriate urination) designed to initiate euthanasia discussions were presented by 2 different undisclosed standardized clients (USCs) to study veterinarian communication during clinical visits. At the end of appointments, the CISC's identity was disclosed, and questionnaires to measure veterinarian and client perceptions of client-centeredness were completed. Agreement was assessed by statistical methods. RESULTS Data were analyzed from 60 appointments (30/scenario). Of 10 questions, significant agreement was found between veterinarians and USCs for only I (extent to which relevant personal and family issues were discussed; k = 0.43) for the dog scenario and 3 (extent of discussion of respective roles [k = 0.43], better preparedness of the USC to make a euthanasia decision [k = 0.42], and discussion of relevant personal and family issues [k = 0.25]) for the cat scenario. When the USC and veterinarian disagreed, the veterinarian perceived that the client-centeredness components were addressed more thoroughly than did the USC. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Lack of agreement was found between USC and veterinarian perceptions, with USCs perceiving less client-centeredness in euthanasia discussions. This communication gap suggested the need for training of veterinarians in eliciting client perspectives and assessing lifestyle-social information, including client social support systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective—To explore the relationship between veterinarian-client-patient interactions and client adherence to dental and surgery recommendations and to test the a priori hypotheses that appointment-specific client satisfaction and relationship-centered care are positively associated with client adherence. Design—Cross-sectional study. Sample—A subsample of 19 companion-animal veterinarians and 83 clients from a larger observational study consisting of 20 randomly recruited veterinarians and a convenience sample of 350 clients from eastern Ontario. Procedures—Videotaped veterinarian-client-patient interactions containing a dentistry recommendation, surgery recommendation, or both were selected for inclusion from the larger sample of interactions coded with the Roter interaction analysis system. Client adherence was measured by evaluating each patient's medical record approximately 6 months after the videotaped interaction. The clarity of the recommendation, appointment-specific client-satisfaction score, and relationship-centered care score were compared between adhering and nonadhering clients. Results—Among the 83 veterinarian-client-patient interactions, 25 (30%) clients adhered to a dentistry recommendation, surgery recommendation, or both. The odds for adherence were 7 times as great for clients who received a clear recommendation, compared with clients who received an ambiguous recommendation from their veterinarian. Moreover, adhering clients were significantly more satisfied as measured after the interview. Interactions resulting in client adherence also had higher scores for relationship-centered care than did interactions leading to nonadherence. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Veterinarian use of a relationship-centered care approach, characterized as a collaborative partnership between a veterinarian and a client with provision of clear recommendations and effective communication of the rationale for the recommendations, has positive implications for client adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]