Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
EDITOR Collier and Hilton have suggested that the patient should enter into an
agreement about the proposed treatment by signing his or her own
prescription.2 This distracts from the main task of
improving doctor-patient communication. The power that the doctor has
within the doctor-patient relationship cannot be underestimated; most
patients would find it difficult to refuse to sign a prescription,
whether during the consultation or afterwards. This is borne out by the
fact that many prescriptions are cashed without the drugs being
taken.3 Having to sign a prescription may make it even
harder for patients to come back and tell the doctor that they broke
the contract by failing to take the drug.
Once a prescription is issued, particularly for chronic illnesses, the
process of fine tuning is important. Patients fail to take drugs for
various reasons, some commonly known (for example, unwanted side
effects) and others more pertinent to individual patients. Clinical
pharmacists are sometimes used in general practice surgeries as
medication counsellors.4 In a recent study I audiotaped 25 consultations and analysed them using qualitative methods. Patients
tended consciously to modify their drugs rather than simply forget.
Factors leading to non-adherence included patients' perceptions about
the potency of their drugs, inadvertent overuse and potential
poisoning, culturally led ideas about the use of drugs long term, and
drugs with a reputation (such as antidepressants and their reputation
for being addictive).
Patients signing a prescription would contribute little to improving
medication concordance. Instead, more will be achieved by further
improving consultation and communication skills as an integral part of
doctors' training, disseminating more evidence from qualitative
studies on patients' health beliefs, and carrying out more research on
the potential use of medication counsellors.
"Medication concordance" is a term used to signify that the
doctor and patient have come to a shared agreement about therapeutic
goals.1 It is merely one end point; to have reached it the
doctor would have had to develop a rapport with the patient, understood
the illness in his or her terms, come to a shared understanding and
agreement about the diagnosis, and imparted information about the
proposed treatment and given alternative choices. The doctor should
provide the patient with alternative professionals for independent
advice and allow time for the patient to decide on his or her future
management. Medication concordance may require a radical change in
consulting styles and a deeper understanding of patients' health
beliefs. The term refers more to a metamorphosis within the profession
than to us enforcing our agenda on the patient.
Rushey Green Group Practice, London SE13 6LL
drjudychen{at}email.msn.com
© BMJ 1999
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.