Confirming comprehension of informed consent as a protection of human subjects.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Michael Paasche-Orlow.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Cultural competence curricula have proliferated throughout medical education. Awareness of the moral underpinnings of this movement can clarify the purpose of such curricula for educators and trainees and serve as a way to evaluate the relationship between the ethics of cultural competence and normative Western medical ethics. Though rarely stated explicitly, the essential principles of cultural competence are (1) acknowledgement of the importance of culture in people's lives, (2) respect for cultural differences, and (3) minimization of any negative consequences of cultural differences. Culturally competent clinicians promote these principles by learning about culture, embracing pluralism, and proactive accommodation. Generally, culturally competent care will advance patient autonomy and justice. In this sense, cultural competence and Western medical ethics are mutually supportive movements. However, Western bioethics and the personal ethical commitments of many medical trainees will place limits on the extent to which they will endorse pluralism and accommodation. Specifically, if the values of cultural competence are thought to embrace ethical relativity, inexorable conflicts will be created. The author presents his view of the ethics of cultural competence and places the concepts of cultural competence in the context of Western moral theory. Clarity about the ethics of cultural competence can help educators promote and evaluate trainees' integration of their own moral intuitions, Western medical ethics, and the ethics of cultural competence.
Although the informed consent process is crucial to protecting human research subjects, there are cases when particular information within the consent form may present risks to those subjects. In this paper, we examine a case in which including the sponsor's name on the consent form may allow the form to serve as a surrogate for subjects' HIV status. There is no literature addressing the ethical acceptability of excluding particular information from consent forms, and there exists little regulatory guidance on this issue. We argue that excluding information from the consent form is, in fact, obligatory when that information is disclosed orally during the consent process but its presence on the form poses risks to the subjects the consent process is designed to protect. Further, we argue that the regulations ought to be amended to reflect this obligation.
BACKGROUND: Although differences between Internal Medicine (IM) and Family Practice (FP) physicians have been examined in terms of care outcomes and cost, there have been few studies of specialty differences in physician-patient communication. METHODS: In 1995, 277 clinical encounters with 29 full-time, community-based FP physicians and 287 clinical encounters with 30 full-time, community based IM physicians were audiotaped. Communication was evaluated with the Roter Interaction Analysis System to reflect data gathering, patient education and counseling, rapport building, partnership building, verbal dominance, and patient-centeredness. Patient satisfaction was measured with an exit questionnaire. RESULTS: IM clinicians ask more biomedical questions (P =.02). FP clinicians engage in more psychosocial discussion (P =.02) and tend to engage in more emotionally supportive exchanges such as empathy and reassurance (P =.06). Significant interaction effects show differential treatment of patient subgroups by specialty; FP physicians were more verbally dominant with female patients (P <.01) and more patient-centered in their communication style with minority patients (P =.03). Although patient satisfaction was similar for IM and FP, satisfaction was more closely linked to measures of rapport and patient-centeredness for patients of FP physicians than for patients of internists. CONCLUSIONS: The current work adds insight into FP and IM differences in both physician-patient communication and predictors of patient satisfaction.