ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2336

Evaluating the Use of Video-Stimulated Recall to Research the Osteoarthritis Consultation in Primary Care: Reaching Parts Other Methods don’t Reach

Zoe Paskins1, Tom Sanders1, Peter Croft1 and Andrew Hassell2, 1Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom, 2School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: consults, Education, evaluation and qualitative, medical

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Research Methodology (ARHP)

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

Background/Purpose

Video-stimulated recall (VSR) is a method of enhancing participants’ accounts of a consultation using a video recording of the event to encourage and prompt participant recall in a post-consultation interview. VSR is used in education and education research, and to a lesser extent in medical and nursing research, although little is known about the validity, utility and acceptability of the method. This abstract describes an evaluation of the use of VSR in a study of the Osteoarthritis (OA) consultation in primary care in the UK. 

Methods

With ethical approval and informed consent, 195 doctor-patient consultations were video-recorded with patients aged ≥ 45. Seventeen consultations in which OA was discussed were the subject of post-consultation interviews using VSR. VSR interviews were conducted with 17 patients and 13 General Practitioners (GPs). Evaluation of the method was achieved by thematic analysis of comments made during video playback, in addition to analysis of observations, field notes, consultation and interview transcripts. Empirical quotes will be presented to illustrate the findings.

Results

Validity

There was evidence of the video altering both GPs’ and patients’ behaviour in the consultation with GPs particularly keen to demonstrate ‘desirable’ behaviours. However, GPs frequently expressed surprise that their actions did not reflect what they felt was best practice, and so we conclude that any altered behaviour would not bias study findings and would likely help interpretation of clinical behaviour during VSR.

Utility

The method was useful to explore meanings behind specific sections of talk in the consultation and both patients and clinicians often adopted a more critical stance to the consultation following playback. VSR resulted in subtly different ‘added value’ to interviews with patients and doctors. Patients were more empowered to reveal emotional narratives following video playback. VSR gently challenged GPs’ descriptions of their “normal” consultations.

Acceptability

Both GPs and patients reported finding the method broadly acceptable with some reporting enjoyment and educational value. However, occasional distress and anxiety occurred in interviews, to which the video playback may have contributed.

Conclusion

This study adds to the existing literature on VSR by describing specifically how this method enables a more critical, specific and in-depth response from participants to events of interest during clinical encounters, and in doing so, generates multiple perspectives on such encounters. The benefits of VSR for clinical and educational research need to be considered in conjunction with the important ethical considerations and the potential for this method to be intrusive.


Disclosure:

Z. Paskins,
None;

T. Sanders,
None;

P. Croft,
None;

A. Hassell,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/evaluating-the-use-of-video-stimulated-recall-to-research-the-osteoarthritis-consultation-in-primary-care-reaching-parts-other-methods-dont-reach/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology