Interrupted opening statements in clinical encounters: A scoping review

Objective: To conduct a scoping review of literature on the duration of patients' opening statements in clinical encounters, with or without an interruption. Methods: We conducted a scoping review to identify articles based on pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. One reviewer extracted study details and outcomes related to the length of patients' opening statements. A second reviewer verified this data. Results: We included 14 studies from 1185 citations reviewed. Encounters were in primary care clinics, specialty clinics, and hospitals. Across six studies, the mean time to interruption was 18.2 s. The mean length of uninterrupted opening statements was 45.9 s across nine studies. Conclusion: Clinicians interrupting their patients' opening statements, compared to not interrupting, takes away time from the patient to fully present their concerns. Research has not focused on the nature of clinician interruptions. For instance, an interruption encouraging expansion or more detail facilitates understanding. Therefore, the impact these interruptions have on the clinical encounter remains unknown. Practice implications: Interrupting the average patient does not save time, so clinicians may benefit from allowing their patients to complete their opening statements.