IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v74y2019i5p756-763..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discourse Features Among Providers, Patients, and Companions and Their Effect on Outcomes of Dementia Diagnosis Disclosure

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew J Wynn
  • Brian D Carpenter

Abstract

Objectives Receiving a diagnosis of dementia has major implications. Although protocols for disclosing difficult information have been developed for other health conditions, no such evidence-based method exists for dementia. As a step toward that goal, this study analyzed the discourse within dementia diagnosis disclosure sessions to identify conversational features associated with psychological outcomes. Method The Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) was used to code the discourse among patients, their companions, and providers during 84 dementia diagnosis disclosure sessions following an initial evaluation at an Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center. Results Providers dominated the conversation in terms of overall time spent talking. With more severe dementia, patients spoke less and companions spoke more. Provider-positive rapport building was associated with lower patient depression and anxiety following the disclosure session. Patient-positive rapport building was associated with higher companion anxiety, but only when the patient was not suspected to have dementia. No associations were found between other types of discourse and patient or companion psychological outcomes. Discussion A relatively small amount of positive rapport building by providers can lead to reduced distress following dementia disclosure. Dementia disclosure best practices should emphasize patient-centered communication techniques in order to minimize psychological distress following diagnosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew J Wynn & Brian D Carpenter, 2019. "Discourse Features Among Providers, Patients, and Companions and Their Effect on Outcomes of Dementia Diagnosis Disclosure," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 74(5), pages 756-763.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:74:y:2019:i:5:p:756-763.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbx154
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:74:y:2019:i:5:p:756-763.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.