Is it acceptable to video-record palliative care consultations for research and training purposes? A qualitative interview study exploring the views of hospice patients, carers and clinical staff
journal contributionposted on 06.03.2017, 15:06 by Marco Pino, Ruth Parry, Luke Feathers, Christina Faull
Background: Research using video recordings can advance understanding of healthcare communication and improve care, but making and using video recordings carries risks. Aim: To explore views of hospice patients, carers and clinical staff about whether videoing patient–doctor consultations is acceptable for research and training purposes. Design: We used semi-structured group and individual interviews to gather hospice patients, carers and clinical staff views. We used Braun and Clark’s thematic analysis. Setting/participants: Interviews were conducted at one English hospice to inform the development of a larger video-based study. We invited patients with capacity to consent and whom the care team judged were neither acutely unwell nor severely distressed (11), carers of current or past patients (5), palliative medicine doctors (7), senior nurses (4) and communication skills educators (5). Results: Participants viewed video-based research on communication as valuable because of its potential to improve communication, care and staff training. Video-based research raised concerns including its potential to affect the nature and content of the consultation and threats to confidentiality; however, these were not seen as sufficient grounds for rejecting video-based research. Video-based research was seen as acceptable and useful providing that measures are taken to reduce possible risks across the recruitment, recording and dissemination phases of the research process. Conclusion: Video-based research is an acceptable and worthwhile way of investigating communication in palliative medicine. Situated judgements should be made about when it is appropriate to involve individual patients and carers in video-based research on the basis of their level of vulnerability and ability to freely consent.
This research was supported in its initial stages by the University of Nottingham, including via a Research Development Fund grant from the University of Nottingham Centre for Advanced Studies; later stages of work were funded by The Health Foundation via an Insight grant RU33. The Health Foundation funded open access publication for this paper. From January 2015 onwards, R.P.’s work, including in finalising this report, was supported by National Institute for Health Research Career Development Fellowship award CDF-2014-07-046.
- Social Sciences
- Communication, Media, Social and Policy Studies