1,590
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Understandings of risk amid wider discursive regimes

‘I’d best take out life insurance, then.’ Conceptualisations of risk and uncertainty in primary care consultations, and implications for shared decision-making

ORCID Icon, , &
Pages 234-251 | Received 16 Feb 2022, Accepted 27 Mar 2023, Published online: 30 Mar 2023
 

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to gain knowledge about interactional factors that support and obstruct mutual risk-assessments and shared decision-making (SDM) in clinical consultations. Through a narrative analysis of verbatim transcripts of 28 naturally occurring consultations performed in English National Health Service practices, we explore the ways in which patients and general practitioners conceptualise, construct and negotiate risks related to diagnostic tests and medical treatments. Consultations were sampled from a corpus of 212 consultation transcripts from the One in a Million: Primary care consultations archive on the basis that they contained the word ‘risk(s)’. Most sampled cases relate to cardiovascular conditions and cancer. Drawing on a social constructionist perspective and the relational theory of risk, we found that while GPs talked about mathematical-probabilistic population risk, patients expressed their own experiences of possible future dangers, conceptualised through words like ‘worried’, ‘scared’ and ‘concerned’. Risk objects, defined here as entities to which harmful consequences are conceptually attached, were constructed differently by patients and GPs, especially in relation to cardiovascular risks. Their different rationalities sometimes obstructed any form of mutual risk-assessments. The relational theory of risk proved to be a useful theoretical frame for exploring layers and configurations of risk constructions among patients and clinicians, and for capturing interactional factors that support and obstruct mutual risk-assessments and SDM. For patients to be able to engage in genuine dialogues and make informed decisions about their care, it is paramount for patients and doctors to co-construct patients’ health-risks during clinical encounters.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The One in a Million study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (208) and the South West GP Trust. The research behind this paper did not receive any specific funding.