Search

Objective To present the Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences (VR-CoDES CC), a consensus based system for coding patient expressions of emotional distress in medical consultations, defined as Cues or Concerns. Methods The system was developed by an international group of communication researchers. First, consensus was reached in different steps. Second, a reliability study was conducted on 20 psychiatric consultations. Results A Cue is defined as a verbal or non-verbal hint which suggests an underlying unpleasant emotion that lacks clarity. A Concern is defined as a clear and unambiguous expression of an unpleasant current or recent emotion that is explicitly verbalized with or without a stated issue of importance. The conceptual framework sets precise criteria for cues and concerns and for whom (health provider or patient) elicits the cue/concern. Inter-rater reliability proved satisfactory (agreement 81.5%, Cohen's Kappa 0.70). Conclusion The VR-CoDES CC will facilitate comparative research on provider–patient communication sequences in which patients express emotional distress. Practice implications The VR-CoDES CC may be used to help clinicians in recognizing or facilitating cues and concerns, thereby improving the recognition of patients’ emotional distress, the therapeutic alliance and quality of care for these patients.

Objective To present a method to classify health provider responses to patient cues and concerns according to the VR-CoDES-CC (Del Piccolo et al. (2009) [2] and Zimmermann et al. (submitted for publication) [3]). The system permits sequence analysis and a detailed description of how providers handle patient's expressions of emotion. Methods The Verona-CoDES-P system has been developed based on consensus views within the “Verona Network of Sequence Analysis”. The different phases of the creation process are described in detail. A reliability study has been conducted on 20 interviews from a convenience sample of 104 psychiatric consultations. Results The VR-CoDES-P has two main classes of provider responses, corresponding to the degree of explicitness (yes/no) and space (yes/no) that is given by the health provider to each cue/concern expressed by the patient. The system can be further subdivided into 17 individual categories. Statistical analyses showed that the VR-CoDES-P is reliable (agreement 92.86%, Cohen's kappa 0.90 (±0.04) p < 0.0001). Conclusion Once validity and reliability are tested in different settings, the system should be applied to investigate the relationship between provider responses to patients’ expression of emotions and outcome variables. Practice implications Research employing the VR-CoDES-P should be applied to develop research-based approaches to maximize appropriate responses to patients’ indirect and overt expressions of emotional needs.

Purpose: To construct a breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ) module to be used in conjunction with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and to test its reliability and validity cross-culturally. Patients and Methods: Module construction took place after the EORTC guidelines for module development. The module-the QLQ-BR23-consists of 23 items covering symptoms and side effects related to different treatment modalities, body image, sexuality, and future perspective. This module was tested in 170 Dutch, 168 Spanish, and 158 American cancer patients at two points in time. The timing for the Dutch and Spanish patients was before and during treatment with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. For the American patients, the questionnaire was administered at admission at the breast clinic and 3 months after the first assessment. Results: Multitrait scaling analysis confirmed the hypothesized structure of four of the five scales. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were, in general, lowest in Spain (range; .46 to .94) and highest in the United States (range; .70 to .91). On the basis of known-groups comparisons, selective scales distinguished clearly between patients differing in disease stage, previous surgery, performance status, and treatment modality, according to expectation. Additionally, selective scales detected change over time as a function of changes in performance status and treatment-induced change. Conclusion: These results lend support to the clinical and cross-cultural validity of the QLQ-BR23 as a supplementary questionnaire for assessing specific quality-of-life issues relevant to patients with breast cancer.