Exploring patients' and physicians' perspectives about competent health advocacy.

SCHOOL environment; OCCUPATIONAL roles; WORK experience (Employment); PATIENT advocacy; EMPATHY; GROUNDED theory; RESEARCH methodology; PHYSICIANS' attitudes; INTERVIEWING; PATIENT-centered care; PATIENTS' attitudes; CLINICAL competence; PHOTOGRAPHY; PHYSICIANS; LISTENING; PATIENT-professional relations

Introduction: Many residency programmes struggle to demonstrate how they prepare trainees to become competent health advocates. To meaningfully teach and assess it, we first need to understand what 'competent' health advocacy (HA) is and what competently enacting it requires. Attempts at clarifying HA have largely centred around the perspectives of consultant physicians and trainees. Without patients' perspectives, we risk training learners to advocate in ways that may be misaligned with patients' needs and goals. Therefore, the purpose of our research was to generate a multi‐perspective understanding about the meaning of competence for the HA role. Methods: We used constructivist grounded theory to explore patients' and physicians' perspectives about competent health advocacy. Data were collected using photo elicitation; patients (n = 10) and physicians (n = 14) took photographs depicting health advocacy that were used to inform semi‐structured interviews. Themes were identified using constant comparative analysis. Results: Physician participants associated HA with disruption or political activism, suggesting that competence hinged on medical and systems expertise, a conducive learning environment, and personal and professional characteristics including experience, status and political savvy. Patient participants, however, equated physician advocacy with patient centredness, perceiving that competent HAs are empathetic and attentive listeners. In contrast to patients, few physicians identified as advocates, raising questions about their ability to train or to thoughtfully assess learners' abilities. Conclusion: Few participants perceived HA as a fundamental physician role—at least not as it is currently defined in curricular frameworks. Misperceptions that HA is primarily disruptive may be the root cause of the HA problem; solving it may rely on focusing training on bolstering skills like empathy and listening not typically associated with the HA role. Since there may be no competency where the patient voice is more critical, we need to explore opportunities for patients to facilitate learning for the HA role. Seeing the same thing differently? LaDonna et al. reveal that patients and physicians do not necessarily view health advocacy the same way and suggest definitions expand to include empathy and listening to improve training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Medical Education is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)