Promoting interactional health equity through (Complementary and Integrative Health) talk during clinical encounters

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Patient Education and Counseling Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-10 DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2025.108651
Evelyn Y. Ho , Christopher J. Koenig
{"title":"Promoting interactional health equity through (Complementary and Integrative Health) talk during clinical encounters","authors":"Evelyn Y. Ho ,&nbsp;Christopher J. Koenig","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2025.108651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) is recognized as a set of modalities to bolster health and well-being often outside of standard biomedical practice. How people discuss CIH with their biomedical providers is a microcosm for health communication more generally. In this Discussion, we propose a revision of the Street et al. (2009) conceptual framework to illustrate how CIH talk during a clinical encounter has the potential to contribute to (or detract from) interactional health equity.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We use discourse analytic techniques to re-analyze two digitally recorded biomedical encounters.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Two case studies are re-analyzed to illustrate how clinician-client conversation about CIH during a clinical encounter might lead to interactional health equity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Interactions with clinicians can be challenging due to differences in knowledge about biomedicine, administrative processes, and even navigating interpersonal relationships. How a clinician responds can either center a biomedical agenda in the Voice of Medicine or help ratify a patient’s agenda in the Voice of the Lifeworld. How clinicians and patients negotiate CIH talk is conceptually linked with immediate interactional outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Practice implications</h3><div>In populations in which patients/caregivers or their extended communities may already have low trust in biomedicine, a mistrustful therapeutic alliance, or history of discrimination, disattention of the Lifeworld and avoiding talk about CIH has the possibility of exacerbating inequities. Every turn at talk during a clinical encounter has the potential to foster increased social participation which, in turn, may contribute to health outcomes and influence patient and community well-being at individual, community, and institutional levels. CIH talk can open space for patients to actively participate in healthcare by incorporating the patients’ Lifeworld into the clinical encounter and can contribute to <em>interactional health equity</em> within clinical encounters.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"134 ","pages":"Article 108651"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Education and Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399125000187","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) is recognized as a set of modalities to bolster health and well-being often outside of standard biomedical practice. How people discuss CIH with their biomedical providers is a microcosm for health communication more generally. In this Discussion, we propose a revision of the Street et al. (2009) conceptual framework to illustrate how CIH talk during a clinical encounter has the potential to contribute to (or detract from) interactional health equity.

Methods

We use discourse analytic techniques to re-analyze two digitally recorded biomedical encounters.

Results

Two case studies are re-analyzed to illustrate how clinician-client conversation about CIH during a clinical encounter might lead to interactional health equity.

Conclusions

Interactions with clinicians can be challenging due to differences in knowledge about biomedicine, administrative processes, and even navigating interpersonal relationships. How a clinician responds can either center a biomedical agenda in the Voice of Medicine or help ratify a patient’s agenda in the Voice of the Lifeworld. How clinicians and patients negotiate CIH talk is conceptually linked with immediate interactional outcomes.

Practice implications

In populations in which patients/caregivers or their extended communities may already have low trust in biomedicine, a mistrustful therapeutic alliance, or history of discrimination, disattention of the Lifeworld and avoiding talk about CIH has the possibility of exacerbating inequities. Every turn at talk during a clinical encounter has the potential to foster increased social participation which, in turn, may contribute to health outcomes and influence patient and community well-being at individual, community, and institutional levels. CIH talk can open space for patients to actively participate in healthcare by incorporating the patients’ Lifeworld into the clinical encounter and can contribute to interactional health equity within clinical encounters.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在临床接触期间通过(补充和综合健康)谈话促进互动健康公平。
目的:补充和综合健康(CIH)被认为是一套通常在标准生物医学实践之外加强健康和福祉的模式。人们如何与他们的生物医学提供者讨论CIH是更普遍的健康交流的一个缩影。在本讨论中,我们建议对Street等人(2009)的概念框架进行修订,以说明临床接触期间的CIH谈话如何有可能促进(或减损)互动健康公平。方法:我们使用话语分析技术重新分析两个数字记录的生物医学相遇。结果:两个案例研究被重新分析,以说明在临床遇到关于CIH的临床-客户对话如何可能导致互动健康公平。结论:由于生物医学知识、管理流程甚至人际关系的差异,与临床医生的互动可能具有挑战性。临床医生如何回应既可以在《医学之声》中以生物医学议程为中心,也可以在《生命世界之声》中帮助批准患者的议程。临床医生和患者如何协商CIH谈话在概念上与直接的相互作用结果有关。实践意义:在患者/护理人员或其扩展社区可能已经对生物医学,不信任的治疗联盟或歧视史信任度较低的人群中,对生活世界的忽视和避免谈论CIH有可能加剧不公平。在临床接触中,每一次谈话都有可能促进更多的社会参与,这反过来又可能有助于健康结果,并在个人、社区和机构层面影响患者和社区的福祉。通过将患者的生活世界融入临床接触,CIH讲座可以为患者积极参与医疗保健开辟空间,并有助于临床接触中的互动健康公平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Patient Education and Counseling
Patient Education and Counseling 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
11.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Patient Education and Counseling is an interdisciplinary, international journal for patient education and health promotion researchers, managers and clinicians. The journal seeks to explore and elucidate the educational, counseling and communication models in health care. Its aim is to provide a forum for fundamental as well as applied research, and to promote the study of organizational issues involved with the delivery of patient education, counseling, health promotion services and training models in improving communication between providers and patients.
期刊最新文献
Patient-centered communication during diagnostic conversations in relation to parental psychosocial outcomes: An exploratory observational study in pediatric leukemia Getting the word out: The case of the Glasgow Consensus Statement Human-centered healthcare: An organizing principle for reinforcing the humanity of healthcare Exploring newly referred patients’ and their caregivers’ display of needs: A microanalysis in specialized outpatient care Opening the door to what matters most in advanced childhood cancer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1