Face-saving strategies and the burden of opioid policy enactments: When physicians' compliance makes patients non-compliant.

The escalation of the opioid epidemic in the United States has sparked sweeping legislation meant to regulate physicians' opioid prescribing practices. The demands of such policies force physicians to initiate discussions that could jeopardize the collaborative doctor–patient relationships necessary for curbing inappropriate opioid prescriptions. Drawing on sociopragmatics, this discourse analysis study of primary care interactions examines the face-saving linguistic features employed by physicians in negotiating the line between policy demands and maintaining collaborative relationships. The findings reveal several face-saving acts—pseudo requests, downtoners, broadening, redirection, tag questions, impersonalization, listing, and (negative) imagery—used by physicians when enacting the three most prominent policies: (1) monitoring opioid use, (2) prescribing anti-overdose medication, and (3) transitioning patients from opioids to alternative treatment. Informed by Goffman's concept of "face-work," this study provides evidence of the communicative burden placed on physicians implementing disagreeable opioid policies, as well as opening up discussions on how policymakers and medical institutions can support physicians in implementing opioid policies. • Discourse analysis of medical consultations surrounding opioids and chronic pain. • Physicians comply with policies patients may disagree with. • Physicians use face-saving strategies to mitigate contentious discourse from enacting policies. • Guidance on language could help ease physicians' communicative burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]