Design of study has several problems

EDITOR—McCabe et al discussed how psychiatrists engage with psychotic patients during routine consultations.1 However, the design of their study may have compromised the conclusions.

The clients selected were already attending a psychiatric outpatient clinic and had willingly agreed to participate in the study. These clients presumably had already engaged with their respective teams, which affects the generalisability of the study to clients who do not engage.

Videotaping the consultation introduces an element of subject and observer bias. The presence of a video camera can affect the nature of the interaction between doctor and client, which again affects the generalisability of the findings to routine clinical consultations. Given that 50% of the clients were not white British, the social interaction may have been influenced by the social, ethnic, and cultural differences between the client and doctor. In addition, clients with psychosis often present with thought disorder, negative symptoms (poverty of thought), and other abnormalities of affect, which makes the interaction qualitatively and quantitatively different from normal conversation.

Some studies have shown that patient centred skills, particularly when giving information and counselling, are related to increased compliance with treatment, improved satisfaction, and decreased symptoms and emotional distress.2 Unfortunately these studies occurred in primary care and may not be applicable to psychiatric consultations. Clients at different stages of psychotic illness need different types of consultations, with the clinician having to judge the amount of information that would be beneficial for each person.

This article has succeeded in highlighting the importance of the consultation between doctor and patient in engaging clients. However, psychiatric treatment is within a multidisciplinary team, with other agencies being equally capable of delivering information. …