Companion Involvement as a Practice for Addressing Patient Resistance
The Case of Traditional Chinese Medicine
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v7i3.151067Keywords:
triadic medical interaction, provider-patient communication, alternative medicine, conversation analysisAbstract
Previous research highlights how the presence of companions can influence the trajectory and outcome of medical encounters. This study, set within the context of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), examines cases where medical professionals enlist patient companions to join the consultation when patients resist the doctors’ medical opinions. Results from this study indicate that when companions participate in this manner, they face the dilemma of either endorsing the doctors and aiding in the implementation of their medical agenda or siding with the patients and being a supportive companion. This may explain why this practice is not always effective in countering patient resistance and securing patient adherence, especially when the patient's resistance is overt and strong.
References
Adelman, R. D., Greene, M. G., & Charon, R. (1987). The Physician-Elderly Patient-Companion Triad in the Medical Encounter: The Development of a Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. The Gerontologist, 27(6), 729–734. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/27.6.729
Antaki, C., & Chinn, D. (2019). Companions’ dilemma of intervention when they mediate between patients with intellectual disabilities and health staff. Patient Education and Counseling, 102(11), 2024–2030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.05.020
Bolden, G. B. (2000). Toward Understanding Practices of Medical Interpreting: Interpreters’ Involvement in History Taking. Discourse Studies, 2(4), 387–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002004001
Chinn, D. (2022). ‘I Have to Explain to him’: How Companions Broker Mutual Understanding Between Patients with Intellectual Disabilities and Health Care Practitioners in Primary Care. Qualitative Health Research, 32(8–9), 1215–1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323221089875
Clayman, M. L., Roter, D., Wissow, L. S., & Bandeen-Roche, K. (2005). Autonomy-related behaviors of patient companions and their effect on decision-making activity in geriatric primary care visits. Social Science & Medicine, 60(7), 1583–1591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.004
Clemente, I. (2009). Progressivity and participation: Children’s management of parental assistance in paediatric chronic pain encounters. Sociology of Health & Illness, 31(6), 872–888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01156.x
DiMatteo, M. R. (2004). Social Support and Patient Adherence to Medical Treatment: A Meta-Analysis. Health Psychology, 23(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.23.2.207
Ellingson, L. L. (2002). The roles of companions in geriatric patient–interdisciplinary oncology team interactions. Journal of Aging Studies, 16(4), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-4065(02)00071-3
Fioramonte, A., & Vásquez, C. (2019). Multi-party talk in the medical encounter: Socio-pragmatic functions of family members’ contributions in the treatment advice phase. Journal of Pragmatics, 139, 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.001
Hepburn, A. (2017). Transcribing for social research. SAGE Publications.
Heritage, J. (1985). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson (Ed.), Structures of Social Action (1st ed., pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.020
Heritage, J., & Robinson, J. D. (2006). The structure of patients' presenting concerns: physicians' opening questions. Health communication, 19(2), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1902_1
Hoey, E. M. (2014). Sighing in Interaction: Somatic, Semiotic, and Social. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(2), 175–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2014.900229
Hsieh, E. (2007). Interpreters as co-diagnosticians: Overlapping roles and services between providers and interpreters. Social Science & Medicine, 64(4), 924–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.10.015
Ishikawa, H., Roter, D. L., Yamazaki, Y., & Takayama, T. (2005). Physician–elderly patient–companion communication and roles of companions in Japanese geriatric encounters. Social Science & Medicine, 60(10), 2307–2320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.071
Laidsaar-Powell, R. C., Butow, P. N., Bu, S., Charles, C., Gafni, A., Lam, W. W. T., Jansen, J., McCaffery, K. J., Shepherd, H. L., Tattersall, M. H. N., & Juraskova, I. (2013). Physician–patient–companion communication and decision-making: A systematic review of triadic medical consultations. Patient Education and Counseling, 91(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2012.11.007
Mikesell, L. (2009). Conversational Practices of a Frontotemporal Dementia Patient and His Interlocutors. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 42(2), 135–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810902864552
Pino, M., Doehring, A., & Parry, R. (2021). Practitioners’ Dilemmas and Strategies in Decision-Making Conversations Where Patients and Companions Take Divergent Positions on a Healthcare Measure: An Observational Study Using Conversation Analysis. Health Communication, 36(14), 2010–2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1813952
Pino, M., & Land, V. (2022). How companions speak on patients’ behalf without undermining their autonomy: Findings from a conversation analytic study of palliative care consultations. Sociology of Health & Illness, 44(2), 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13427
Pino, M., Land, V., & Hoey, E. (2024). Moving Towards (and Away From) Possible Discussions About Dying: Emergent Outcomes of Companions’ Actions in Hospice Consultations. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v7i3.144611
Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9(2–3), 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148128
Robinson, J. D. (1998). Getting down to business: Talk, gaze, and body orientation during openings of doctor-patient consultations. Human Communication Research, 25(1), 97-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1998.tb00438.x
Robinson, J. D. (2003). An interactional structure of medical activities during acute visits and its implications for patients' participation. Health Communication, 15(1), 27-59. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327027HC1501_2
Robinson, J. D. (2013). Epistemics, action formation, and other-initiation of repair: The case of partial questioning repeats. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversational Repair and Human Understanding (pp. 261–292). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511757464.009
Robinson, J. D., & Kevoe-Feldman, H. (2010). Using Full Repeats to Initiate Repair on Others’ Questions. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 43(3), 232–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2010.497990
Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2012). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis (1st ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001
Solomon, O., Heritage, J., Yin, L., Maynard, D. W., & Bauman, M. L. (2016). ‘What Brings Him Here Today?’: Medical Problem Presentation Involving Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders and Typically Developing Children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(2), 378–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2550-2
Stivers, A. (2004). “No no no” and Other Types of Multiple Sayings in Social Interaction. Human Communication Research, 30(2), 260–293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00733.x
Stivers, T. (2002). Presenting the Problem in Pediatric Encounters: “Symptoms Only” Versus “Candidate Diagnosis” Presentations. Health Communication, 14(3), 299–338. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327027HC1403_2
Stivers, T. (2005). Parent Resistance to Physicians’ Treatment Recommendations: One Resource for Initiating a Negotiation of the Treatment Decision. Health Communication, 18(1), 41–74. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1801_3
Stivers, T. (2007). Prescribing under pressure: Parent-physician conversations and antibiotics. Oxford University Press.
Stommel, W. J. P., & Stommel, M. W. J. (2021). Participation of Companions in Video-Mediated Medical Consultations: A Microanalysis. In J. Meredith, D. Giles, & W. Stommel (Eds.), Analysing Digital Interaction (pp. 177–203). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64922-7_9
Tsai, M. (2015). Where do they stand? Spatial arrangement of patient companions in geriatric out-patient interaction in Taiwan. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v4i2.239
Vick, J. B., Amjad, H., Smith, K. C., Boyd, C. M., Gitlin, L. N., Roth, D. L., Roter, D. L., & Wolff, J. L. (2018). “Let him speak:” a descriptive qualitative study of the roles and behaviors of family companions in primary care visits among older adults with cognitive impairment. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4732
Wei, W. (2021). Medical interaction in traditional Chinese medicine. https://doi.org/10.7282/T3-M9G3-EA30
Wei, W. (2024). Beyond the patient-doctor dyad: Examining “other” patient engagement in Traditional Chinese Medicine consultations. Social Science & Medicine, 340, 116390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116390
Werner, P., Gafni, A., & Kitai, E. (2004). Examining physician-patient-caregiver encounters: The case of Alzheimer’s disease patients and family physicians in Israel. Aging & Mental Health, 8(6), 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607860412331303793
Wolff, J. L., & Roter, D. L. (2012). Older Adults’ Mental Health Function and Patient-Centered Care: Does the Presence of a Family Companion Help or Hinder Communication? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(6), 661–668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-011-1957-5
Yan, T., & Yang, M. (2024). Adult Children as Companions in Geriatric Consultations: An Interpersonal Perspective from China. Health Communication, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2364442
杨子, 王雪明, & 伍娜. (2018). 第三方陪同就诊的会话特征分析. 语言教学与研究, (1), 101-112.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We follow the Budapest Open Access Initiative's definition of Open Access.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions.
The journal allows software/spiders to automatically crawl the journal content (also known as text mining)
The journal provides article level metadata to DOAJ
The journal allows readers to read, download, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose.
