The patient in this scenario has minimally formed values, but the physician works with the patient to discover and develop these values. The physician presents carefully selected medical information to the patient. Decision-making is a shared effort, but the physician encourages specific recommendations based on an interpretation of established health-related values. Continuing in the direction of greater patient involvement is the interpretive scenario,

in which the patient has inchoate values regarding the situation which the physician helps to elucidate. Substantial Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical dialogue regarding the condition and interventions is exchanged between physician and patient. Once presented with the pertinent information, the patient makes the decision, with the physician acting mainly as a counselor. Lastly is the informative scenario, where patient autonomy Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical is high and the patient has well-formed values; the patient alone takes on decision-making responsibilities. The physician’s role is as a conduit of all NVP-AUY922 cell line relevant medical information. In the Emanuel and Emanuel system of

understanding the patient–physician interaction, the prior formation of patient values, the extent of autonomy, and the amount of medical information provided to the patient by the physician are all coupled and change simultaneously. Thus Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical the paternalistic model is characterized by low values formation, low autonomy, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and low information disclosure, while high values formation, high autonomy, and high information delivery are found in the informative model. In the intervening decades, additional models of patient–physician interaction have examined aspects more or less addressed in the Emanuel and Emanuel model. To this end, Charles and colleagues

created a model examining the interplay of patient autonomy and information exchange, stressing that the combination of these and other variables exists on a continuum, rather than at the discrete points suggested by Emanuel and Emanuel.17 Bradley and colleagues, recognizing the likely influence of family and friends in decision-making, developed a model where the key players Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical in decision-making served as central variables.9 Humphrey et al. developed a model incorporating physician interaction style and patient coping ability, while others have further examined the role of injury severity on interaction, or studied the clinical encounter PD184352 (CI-1040) through a complex interplay of cognitive, emotional, and reflective demands.18–20 UNDERSTANDING PATIENT VALUES AND AUTONOMY Patient values and patient autonomy are central variables in many models of patient–physician interaction. To assist in understanding exactly why this is the case, and to facilitate further discussion, it would be helpful to first consider definitions of these terms. The term value itself is generally defined as the beliefs or principles of a person or group that are used to guide decisions and way of life.