Causal Rewrite-wildcuttlefish

Communications and Patient’s Care

To observe the performance of doctors in hospitals, often times patients are given surveys to rate how their treatment was. Shockingly, results shown that families with lower income generally have poorer performances. Some assumptions came up by people claiming that perhaps some doctors are biased to their patients and perform better for the richer people; however, that thought was discarded because there is no way of telling which doctors have that mindset. In addition, majority of the patients are changed into hospital gowns, which may make it harder to distinguish between rich and poor patients.  Therefore, to dig deeper into finding out why does poor patients do not get the same care from doctors, the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston raises the possibility, “do patients of higher socioeconomic status simply have an easier time communicating with doctors, and hence are more satisfied with their care than less-well-off people?”

Communication between the physicians and the patient play a huge part because with that communication, it helps the doctors make decisions and  figure out how to help the patient. According to American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the benefits of effective communication is that “the patient and physician have developed a ‘partnership’ and the patient has been fully educated in the nature of his or her condition and the different methods to address the problem.” By forming this partnership, patients will have more of a say of what they want, which has shown more satisfactory. Studies by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons show that a more effective partnerships include doctors who are good listeners and the patient’s communication skills. Furthermore, with good communication between the doctors and patients, it will be made clear between the doctors and patients what to expect, the goals, and what is going on in the processes of the care.

Since communication has a huge influence on how well the doctors perform and how satisfied the patients are, it is a possible answer to why people from poorer backgrounds give lower ratings for doctors because there may be a gap between the patient and doctor. Gaps like a language barrier, lack of health literacy, and lack of communication skills are things that are common in people living in the lower social class and may cause difficulty for understanding between patients and doctors.

This entry was posted in A11: Causal Rewrite, P/wildcuttlefish, wildcuttlefish. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Causal Rewrite-wildcuttlefish

  1. wildcuttlefish says:

    feedback was requested.

    Feedback provided.
    –DSH

    Like

  2. davidbdale says:

    P1. This post needs a polish, wcf.
    –What does this mean: Some assumptions came up by people claiming?
    –Are you sure this is the best phrasing for your claim: deeper into finding out why does poor patients do not get the same care from doctors?

    Your argument here is hard to follow, I’m afraid:
    –Patients are given surveys to rate treatment
    –Poor FAMILIES have POORER PERFORMANCES
    –Some observers suggested doctors discriminate against poor patients.
    –That conclusion was refuted because specific cases couldn’t be proved.
    –That conclusion was refuted also because in general it seems unlikely
    –Therefore, to provide a trustworthy conclusion, a hospital hatched a theory.

    Does it flow like an argument to you, wcf?
    Without a definition for poor performance, we can’t tell if doctors are practicing good medicine or not, so we don’t know if the “problem” of “poor performance” is that patients die or get sicker, or whether patients are just dissatisfied with their healthcare outcomes. Until you identify the problem more clearly, it’s too soon to refute the discrimination explanation. We haven’t even claimed that doctors are responsible for the “poor performance” yet.

    Your Definition Argument felt like a Causal Argument, wcf, and this Causal Argument feels like a Rebuttal Argument.

    P2. Speaking bluntly now, wcf, because there’s little time left to waste on nuance, you appear to have very few cards to play, and you’re shuffling the same hand each time, laying the same cards on the table to suit every purpose.

    The Cards:
    –MGH asks the question: do rich patients get better treatment because they communicate better with doctors?
    –Good communication helps doctors and patients set realistic expectations.
    –Good communication also helps doctors and patients choose the best treatments.
    –Poor patients are dissatisfied with their care either because they didn’t get the best treatment OR because they received unexpected outcomes.

    I’ve seen all of these in all your short arguments.
    –What’s missing is the research that would explain whether poor patients are dissatisfied with the outcomes or that the outcomes were unexpected.
    –What’s missing is the research that would explain WHY there isn’t better communication between poor patients and their doctors.
    –Your rebuttal material wants to absolve doctors because they are “income-blind,” but is that the only way to exonerate them?

    It’s late to be asking fundamental questions about your research project, wildcuttlefish, but I hope this is helpful and not just frustrating.

    Reply, please.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s