Patient perceptions of physician empathy, satisfaction with physician, interpersonal trust, and compliance

Objectives: This study was designed to investigate psychometric properties of the Jefferson Scale of Patient Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE), and to examine correlations between its scores and measures of overall satisfaction with physicians, personal trust, and indicators of patient compliance. Methods: Research participants included 535 out-patients (between 18-75 years old, 66% female). A survey was mailed to participants which included the JSPPPE (5-item), a scale for measuring overall satisfaction with the primary care physician (10-item), and demographic questions. Patients were also asked about compliance with their physician\u27s recommendation for preventive tests (colonoscopy, mammogram, and PSA for age and gender appropriate patients). Results: Factor analysis of the JSPPPE resulted in one prominent component. Corrected item-total score correlations ranged from .88 to .94. Correlation between scores of the JSPPPE and scores on the patient satisfaction scale was 0.93. Scores of the JSPPPE were highly correlated with measures of physician-patient trust (r \u3e.73). Higher scores of the JSPPPE were significantly associated with physicians\u27 recommendations for preventive tests (colonoscopy, mammogram, and PSA) and with compliance rates which were \u3e .80). Cronbach\u27s coefficient alpha for the JSPPPE ranged from .97 to .99 for the total sample and for patients in different gender and age groups. Conclusions: Empirical evidence supported the psychometrics of the JSPPPE, and confirmed significant links with patients\u27 satisfaction with their physicians, interpersonal trust, and compliance with physicians\u27 recommendations. Availability of this psychometrically sound instrument will facilitate empirical research on empathy in patient care in different countries

Teaching Junior Medical Students About the Current Health Care System

No abstract available

Relationships between scores on the Jefferson Scale of physician empathy, patient perceptions of physician empathy, and humanistic approaches to patient care: a validity study.

BACKGROUND: Empathy is the backbone of a positive physician-patient relationship. Physician empathy and the patient\u27s awareness of the physician\u27s empathic concern can lead to a more positive clinical outcome. MATERIAL/METHODS: The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) was completed by 36 physicians in the Family Medicine residency program at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, and 90 patients evaluated these physicians by completing the Jefferson Scale of Patient Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE), and a survey about physicians\u27 humanistic approaches to patient care. RESULTS: A statistically significant correlation was found between scores of the JSPE and JSPPPE (r=0.48, p CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide further support for the validity of the JSPE. Implications for the assessments of empathy in the physician-patient relationship as related to clinical outcomes are discussed

The Effect of Reflection Rounds on Medical Students’ Empathy

Background: A decline in empathy has been noted in medical students in medical education and training. This decline raises concerns because empathic physician-patient interactions positively impact health outcomes and patient satisfaction. We tested the hypothesis that Reflection Rounds would increase empathy scores of third-year medical students. Methods: Third-year students entering their Family and Community Medicine (FCM) clerkship completed the Jefferson Physician Scale of Empathy – Student Version (JPSE-S) at the onset of their clerkship; students at the Jefferson Campus site were assigned to the experimental group and students at Affiliate Sites were assigned to the control group. The experimental group attended four 1-hour Reflection Round sessions during the 6-week clerkship. These small group sessions were structured under the guidance of a clinician and a member of the pastoral care department, both of whom were trained to facilitate Reflection Rounds. The control group did not have Reflection Rounds. Both groups took JSE-S at the end of the clerkship. Results: At the start of the clerkship, there were no significant difference in empathy scores between the two groups. After the clerkship, there was a significant increase in student empathy scores among the students who experienced the Reflection Rounds improving from a mean score of 114.1 to 116.5, with a p-value of 0.04. There was no significant change in either direction among the students who did not participate in Reflection Rounds. When analyzed by gender, we found the change in empathy scores in the experimental group was statistically significant for women, but not for men. Discussion: These results indicate that Reflection Rounds help improve the empathy of medical students. Further evaluation with larger samples and with longitudinal analysis would be interesting to determine if the improvement in empathy acts differently by gender, and if the change is sustained over a longer period of time

How Well Do Medical Students Understand the Consequences of the Debt They Are Accumulating?

No abstract available

Resident UME Updates

Agenda Guidelines for Students in Clinical Spaces Grading and feedback RIME scheme Telehealth, QI curriculum Phase 3 Updates and JeffDOT Q&

The Changing Health Care Environment is Affecting the Specialty Selection of Students and Residents

No abstract available

JAMA Study on Jefferson\u27s Rural Physician Shortage Area Program (PSAP)

No abstract available

Evaluating the quality of psychosocial care in outpatient medical oncology settings using performance indicators

Abstract Objective: An American Psychosocial Oncology Society workgroup has developed indicators of the quality of psychosocial care that can be measured through review of medical records. The present report describes the first large-scale use of these indicators to evaluate psychosocial care in outpatient medical oncology settings. Methods: Medical records of 1660 colorectal, breast and non-small cell cancer patients first seen by a medical oncologist in 2006 at 11 practice sites in Florida were reviewed for performance on indicators of the quality of psychosocial care. Results: Assessment of emotional well-being was significantly less likely to be documented than assessment of pain (52 vs 87%, po0.001). A problem with emotional well-being was documented in 13% of records and evidence of action taken was documented in 58% of these records. Ten of eleven practice sites performed below an 85% threshold on each indicator of psychosocial care. Variability in assessment of emotional-well being was associated (po0.02) with practice site and patient gender and age while variability in assessment of pain was associated (po0.001) with practice site and cancer type. Conclusions: Findings illustrate how use of the psychosocial care indicators permits identification of specific practice sites and processes of care that should be targeted for quality improvement efforts. Additionally, findings demonstrate the extent to which routine assessment of emotional well-being lags behind routine assessment of pain in cancer patients