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

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Patient Education and Counseling Pub 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":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","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":"","PubModel":"","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
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
Editorial Board Web-based educational tools and decision aids for patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review Dismissive medicine and gaslighting of patients by physicians – A bioethics lens Parental satisfaction with diagnosis disclosure: A study on parents of children or adults with genetic syndromes “What can I trust”: Exploring impact of dual-channel service review quality on patients’ online healthcare choices
×
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:481959085
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