Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Primary Care
Published in: BMC Primary Care 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

‘Motivational work’: a qualitative study of preventive health dialogues in general practice

Authors: Marie Broholm-Jørgensen, Siff Monrad Langkilde, Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen, Pia Vivian Pedersen

Published in: BMC Primary Care | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this article is to explore preventive health dialogues in general practice in the context of a pilot study of a Danish primary preventive intervention ‘TOF’ (a Danish acronym for ‘Early Detection and Prevention’) carried out in 2016. The intervention consisted of 1) a stratification of patients into one of four groups, 2) a digital support system for both general practitioners and patients, 3) an individual digital health profile for each patient, and 4) targeted preventive services in either general practice or a municipal health center.

Methods

The empirical material in this study was obtained through 10 observations of preventive health dialogues conducted in general practices and 18 semi-structured interviews with patients and general practitioners. We used the concept of ‘motivational work’ as an analytical lens for understanding preventive health dialogues in general practice from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients.

Results

While the health dialogues in TOF sought to reveal patients’ motivations, understandings, and priorities related to health behavior, we find that the dialogues were treatment-oriented and structured around biomedical facts, numeric standards, and risk factor guidance. Overall, we find that numeric standards and quantification of motivation lessens the dialogue and interaction between General Practitioner and patient and that contextual factors relating to the intervention framework, such as a digital support system, the general practitioners’ perceptions of their professional position as well as the patients’ understanding of prevention —in an interplay—diminished the motivational work carried out in the health dialogues.

Conclusion

The findings show that the influence of different kinds of context adds to the complexity of prevention in the clinical encounter which help to explain why motivational work is difficult in general practice.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Vallgarda S. Det danske sundhedsvæsen [the Danish healthcare system]. In: Vallgarda S, Krasnik A, editors. Sundhedsvæsen og sundhedspolitik. 3rd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 2016. p. 43–60.
2.
3.
Jallinoja P, Absetz P, Kuronen R, Nissinen A, Talja M, Uutela A, et al. The dilemma of patient responsibility for lifestyle change: perceptions among primary care physicians and nurses. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2007;25:244.PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Broholm-Jørgensen M, Guassora AD, Reventlow S, Dalton SO, Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T. Balancing trust and power: a qualitative study of GPs perceptions and strategies for retaining patients in preventive health checks. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2017;89:1–9.
5.
Thomas K, Bendtsen P, Krevers B. Implementation of healthy lifestyle promotion in primary care: patients as coproducers. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;97(2):283–90.PubMed
6.
Walter U, Flick U, Neuber A, Fischer C, Hussein RJ, Schwartz FW. Putting prevention into practice: qualitative study of factors that inhibit and promote preventive care by general practitioners, with a focus on elderly patients. BMC Fam Pract. 2010;11:68.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Jacobsen ET, Rasmussen SR, Christensen M, Engberg M, Lauritzen T. Perspectives on lifestyle intervention: the views of general practitioners who have taken part in a health promotion study. Scand J Public Health. 2005;33(1):4–10.PubMed
8.
Nygaard P, Aasland OG. Barriers to implementing screening and brief interventions in general practice: findings from a qualitative study in Norway. Alcohol Alcohol. 2011;46(1):52–60.PubMed
9.
Nielsen KDB, Dyhr L, Lauritzen T, Malterud K. Long-term impact of elevated cardiovascular risk detected by screening. A qualitative interview study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2005;23(4):233–8.
10.
Risor MB, Spigt M, Iversen R, Godycki-Cwirko M, Francis N, Altiner A, et al. The complexity of managing COPD exacerbations: a grounded theory study of European general practice. BMJ Open. 2013;3(12):e003861.PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Broholm-Jørgensen M, Kamstrup-Larsen N, Guassora AD, Reventlow S, Dalton SO, Tjornhoj-Thomsen T. Negotiation, temporality and context – a qualitative study of the clinical encounter. Eur J Pers Cent Healthc. 2019;7(2):334–43.
12.
Larsen LB, Sonderlund AL, Sondergaard J, Thomsen JL, Halling A, Hvidt NC, et al. Targeted prevention in primary care aimed at lifestyle-related diseases: a study protocol for a non-randomised pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2018;19(1):124.PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Frohlich KL, Corin E, Potvin L. A theoretical proposal for the relationship between context and disease. Soc Health Illness. 2001;23(6):776–97.
14.
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. PsycholRev. 1977;82:2191–215.
15.
Guassora AD, Reventlow S, Malterud K. Shame, honor and responsibility in clinical dialog about lifestyle issues: a qualitative study about patients’ presentations of self. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;97(2):195–9.PubMed
16.
Mason J. Qualitative researching, vol. third. London: Sage Publications; 2018.
17.
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.
18.
Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Etnography - principles in practice vol. third. New York: Routhledge; 2007.
19.
Whitlock EP, Orleans CT, Pender N, Allan J. Evaluating primary care behavioral counseling interventions: an evidence-based approach. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(4):267–84.PubMed
20.
Miller WR, Rollnick S. Ten things that motivational interviewing is not. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2009;37(2):129–40.PubMed
21.
Rollnick S, Miller WR, Butler CC, Aloia MS. Motivational interviewing in health care: helping patients change behavior. COPD. 2008;5:3.
22.
Rosdahl G. Den motiverende samtale i teori og praksis. København: Munksgaard; 2014.
23.
Hacking I. Making up people. In: Heller TL, Sosna M, Wellbery DE, editors. Reconstructing individualism. Standford: Standford University Press; 1985. p. 222–36.
24.
Tavory I, Timmermans S. Abductive analysis - theorizing qualitative research. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2014.
25.
Guassora AD, Nielsen SB, Reventlow S. Deciding if lifestyle is a problem: GP risk assessments or patient evaluations? A conversation analytic study of preventive consultations in general practice. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2015;33(3):191–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Oxlund B. Living by numbers. Suomen Antropologi. 2012;37(3):42–56.
27.
Gordon DR. Tenacious assumptions in Western medicine. In: Lock M, Gordon DR, editors. Biomedicine examined. 22nd ed. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1988.
28.
Malterud K, Hollnagel H. Avoiding humiliations in the clinical encounter. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2007;25(2):69–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Jones LE, Roberts LC, Little PS, Mullee MA, Cleland JA, Cooper C. Shared decision-making in back pain consultations: an illusion or reality? Eur. Spine J. 2014;23(Suppl 1):S13–9.
30.
Mjølstad BP, Kirkengen AL, Getz L, Hetlevik I. What do GPs actually know about their patients as persons? Eur J Pers Cent Healthc. 2013;1(1):149–60.
31.
Beich A, Gannik D, Malterud K. Screening and brief intervention for excessive alcohol use: qualitative interview study of the experiences of general practitioners. BMJ. 2002;325(7369):870.PubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Nilsen S, Malterud K. What happens when the doctor denies a patient’s request? A qualitative interview study among general practitioners in Norway. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2017;35(2):201–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Balint M. The doctor, his patient and the illness, Revis 5. Printing edn. Madison: International Universities Press; 1988.
34.
Crampton NH, Reis S, Shachak A. Computers in the clinical encounter: a scoping review and thematic analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016;23(3):654–65.PubMed
35.
Street RL Jr, Liu L, Farber NJ, Chen Y, Calvitti A, Zuest D, et al. Provider interaction with the electronic health record: the effects on patient-centered communication in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96(3):315–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Andersen RS, Vedsted P, Olesen F, Bro F, Sondergaard J. Does the organizational structure of health care systems influence care-seeking decisions? A qualitative analysis of Danish cancer patients’ reflections on care-seeking. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2011;29(3):144–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Lambe B, Collins C. A qualitative study of lifestyle counselling in general practice in Ireland. Fam Pract. 2010;27(2):219–23.PubMed
38.
Kaltsa A, Holloway A, Cox K. Factors that influence mammography screening behaviour: a qualitative study of Greek women’s experiences. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2013;17(3):292–301.PubMed
39.
Offersen SMH, Risør MB, Vedsted P, Andersen RS. Am I fine? Exploring everyday life ambiguities and potentialities of embodied sensations in a Danish middle-class community. Med anthropol Theory. 2016;3(3):23–45.
40.
Broholm-Jørgensen M, Kamstrup-Larsen N, Guassora AD, Reventlow S, Dalton SO, Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T. ‘It can’t do any harm’: a qualitative exploration of accounts of participation in preventive health checks. Health Risk Soc. 2019;1:1–17.
41.
Dahl M, Lindholt J, Sogaard R, Frost L, Andersen LS, Lorentzen V. An interview-based study of non-attendance at screening for cardiovascular diseases and diabetes in older women: non-attendees’ perspectives. J Clin Nurs. 2017;27(5-6):939.PubMed
42.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.PubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Derksen FA, Olde Hartman TC, Bensing JM, Lagro-Janssen AL. Managing barriers to empathy in the clinical encounter: a qualitative interview study with GPs. Br J Gen Pract. 2016;66(653):e887–95.PubMedPubMedCentral
44.
Andersen RS, Risor MB. The importance of contextualization. Anthropological reflections on descriptive analysis, its limitations and implications. Anthropol Med. 2014;21(3):345–56.PubMed
Metadata
Title
‘Motivational work’: a qualitative study of preventive health dialogues in general practice
Authors
Marie Broholm-Jørgensen
Siff Monrad Langkilde
Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen
Pia Vivian Pedersen
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Primary Care / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 2731-4553
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01249-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Primary Care 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Knowledge, attitudes and skills of dementia care in general practice: a cross-sectional study in primary health settings in Beijing, China

Research article

Awareness, attitudes, barriers, and knowledge about evidence-based medicine among family physicians in Croatia: a cross-sectional study

Research article

Prescribing and medical non-adherence after myocardial infarction: qualitative interviews with general practitioners in Germany

Research article

Factors that facilitate recognition and management of domestic violence by primary care physicians in a Chinese context - a mixed methods study in Hong Kong

Research article

Exploring perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of Thai patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus as they relate to medication adherence at an out-patient primary care clinic in Chiang Mai, Thailand

Research article

The relationship between having a regular general practitioner (GP) and the experience of healthcare barriers: a cross-sectional study among young people in NSW, Australia, with oversampling from marginalised groups