One really can’t avoid articles about communication in health care these days. Patient-provider communication, provider-provider communication, it’s all over the place. Communication has always been key; we just seem to be catching on finally. There are still some gaps, though.
This article is about malnutrition; the take-home message is that improved communication between providers could lower the incidence of malnourishment. That would be fabulous!
In this article, the point about improving communication seems to be missed. Improving communication is not meant to increase compliance. What? That’s basically saying, “if I communicate better with you, you’ll be better about doing what I tell you to do.”
How about looking at it from this angle: improving communication is more likely to increase patient engagement, which is more likely to improve health outcomes. In addition, improving communication is more likely to increase trust in the provider relationship, which is more likely to increase follow visits (which is more likely to improve health outcomes).
The point is not necessarily to communicate more, it’s to communicate better. The language we use and the messages we send as part of that communication are critical to improvement. First we have to figure out what we’re trying to accomplish. I think it’s safe to say that everyone wants positive health outcomes. And then work backwards from there (see above).