IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v290y2021ics0277953621003397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Arriving at no: Patient pressure to prescribe antibiotics and physicians’ responses

Author

Listed:
  • Stivers, Tanya
  • Timmermans, Stefan

Abstract

While the vast majority of Acute Respiratory Infections (ARIs) are viral, between a quarter and a third of adults presenting with ARIs are given an antibiotic, making antibiotic prescribing for ARIs a major contributor to the inappropriate prescribing problem. We argue that inappropriate prescribing persists because of the interplay between physicians and patients in the medical visit. Relying on a convenience sample of 68 video recordings of primary care medical visits drawn from corpora collected in 2003–2004 and 2015–2016 in the US, we show that although few patients are “demanding” or “requesting” antibiotics, many convey subtle forms of pressure through priming physicians for a bacterial diagnosis in their problem presentations; nudging towards a bacterial diagnosis during information gathering; and resisting non-antibiotic recommendations during the counseling phase. We find that patient priming, nudging, and resisting are effective strategies to influence clinical prescribing behavior. However, we also identify two ways that physicians can counter patient pressure by working to manage patient expectations through foreshadowing a non-antibiotic outcome and using persuasion when confronted with resistance. These, we show, are effective means of countering patient pressure. We argue for the dual importance of how physicians communicate and when they communicate.

Suggested Citation

  • Stivers, Tanya & Timmermans, Stefan, 2021. "Arriving at no: Patient pressure to prescribe antibiotics and physicians’ responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:290:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621003397
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621003397
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heritage, John & Stivers, Tanya, 1999. "Online commentary in acute medical visits: a method of shaping patient expectations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(11), pages 1501-1517, December.
    2. Stivers, Tanya, 2005. "Non-antibiotic treatment recommendations: delivery formats and implications for parent resistance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 949-964, March.
    3. Wang, Nan Christine & Liu, Yuetong, 2021. "Going shopping or consulting in medical visits: Caregivers’ roles in pediatric antibiotic prescribing in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    4. Kushida, Shuya & Kawashima, Michie & Abe, Tetsuya, 2021. "Recommending no further treatment: Gatekeeping work of generalists at a Japanese university hospital," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    5. Stivers, Tanya, 2002. "Participating in decisions about treatment: overt parent pressure for antibiotic medication in pediatric encounters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(7), pages 1111-1130, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Toerien, Merran, 2021. "When do patients exercise their right to refuse treatment? A conversation analytic study of decision-making trajectories in UK neurology outpatient consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    2. Tate, Alexandra, 2020. "Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    3. Bergen, Clara & McCabe, Rose, 2021. "Negative stance towards treatment in psychosocial assessments: The role of personalised recommendations in promoting acceptance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    4. White, Anne Elizabeth Clark, 2020. "When and how do surgeons initiate noticings of additional concerns?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    5. Turowetz, Jason, 2022. "Interaction order and the labeling of disorder: How parents mobilize personal knowledge in the clinic to resist medicalization of their children's behavior," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    6. Hudak, Pamela L. & Clark, Shannon J. & Raymond, Geoffrey, 2011. "How surgeons design treatment recommendations in orthopaedic surgery," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(7), pages 1028-1036.
    7. Wang, Nan Christine & Liu, Yuetong, 2021. "Going shopping or consulting in medical visits: Caregivers’ roles in pediatric antibiotic prescribing in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    8. Chatwin, John & Kennedy, Anne & Firth, Adam & Povey, Andrew & Rogers, Anne & Sanders, Caroline, 2014. "How potentially serious symptom changes are talked about and managed in COPD clinical review consultations: A micro-analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 120-136.
    9. Gibson, Mark & Neil Jenkings, K. & Wilson, Rob & Purves, Ian, 2006. "Verbal prescribing in general practice consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 1684-1698, September.
    10. Pilnick, Alison & Dingwall, Robert, 2011. "On the remarkable persistence of asymmetry in doctor/patient interaction: A critical review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1374-1382, April.
    11. Rynkiewich, Katharina & Gole, Sarin & Won, Sarah & Schwartz, David N., 2023. "Cultures of antibiotic prescribing in medical intensive care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    12. Collins, Sarah & Drew, Paul & Watt, Ian & Entwistle, Vikki, 2005. "'Unilateral' and 'bilateral' practitioner approaches in decision-making about treatment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 2611-2627, December.
    13. Maynard, Douglas W., 2006. ""Does it mean I'm gonna die?": On meaning assessment in the delivery of diagnostic news," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(8), pages 1902-1916, April.
    14. Broom, Alex & Broom, Jennifer & Kirby, Emma, 2014. "Cultures of resistance? A Bourdieusian analysis of doctors' antibiotic prescribing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 81-88.
    15. Angell, Beth & Bolden, Galina B., 2015. "Justifying medication decisions in mental health care: Psychiatrists' accounts for treatment recommendations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 44-56.
    16. Wang, Nan Christine, 2020. "Understanding antibiotic overprescribing in China: A conversation analysis approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    17. Montenegro, Roberto E. & Dori-Hacohen, Gonen, 2020. "Morality in sugar talk: Presenting blood glucose levels in routine diabetes medical visits," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    18. Dooley, Jemima & Barnes, Dr Rebecca, 2022. "Negotiating ‘the problem’ in GP home visits to people with dementia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    19. Stefanie Lopriore & Amanda LeCouteur & Katie Ekberg & Stuart Ekberg, 2019. "“You'll have to be my eyes and ears”: A conversation analytic study of physical examination on a health helpline," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1-2), pages 330-339, January.
    20. Zhao, Chunjuan & Ma, Wen, 2020. "Patient resistance towards clinicians’ diagnostic test-taking advice and its management in Chinese outpatient clinic interaction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).

    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:eee:socmed:v:290:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621003397. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.