The Public’s Response to Communication between a Terminal Cancer Patient and Physicians: A Qualitative Study of Three Sets of Online News Comments

Abstract

This study explored the public’s response to an incident involving publicity about how physicians broke bad news to a terminal cancer patient by analyzing 1,960 comments from three online news websites that reported on this event using Braun and Clarke’s theme analysis methods. Three themes and 10 subthemes emerged from the public’s responses to the way the physicians broke the bad news. Theme 1 (a physician is a person who tells the facts) contained the following subthemes: physicians are responsible for delivering facts, but it is a matter of consideration for patients to deliver bad news to them, empathy and consolation should be expected from people other than physicians, and physicians who say what patients want to hear are cheaters. Theme 2 (there is a problem with physicians) included the following subthemes: the physicians’ empathy or personality and problems with their communication methods. Theme 3 (there are obstacles to communication with dying patients) had the following subthemes: physicians become emotionally dull and find it very stressful to break bad news, giving hope to dying patients can lead to medical disputes, and empathy and consolation are also costly. When breaking bad news, the physicians delivered factual information, but they did so inappropriately, and emotional support for the patient was insufficient. In medical communication education, it is necessary to emphasize training in emotional support. In the medical field, an environment should be created where physicians can communicate as they have learned.