555 research outputs found

    Patient enablement requires physician empathy: a cross-sectional study of general practice consultations in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation in Scotland

    Get PDF
    <b>Background</b> Patient 'enablement' is a term closely aligned with 'empowerment' and its measurement in a general practice consultation has been operationalised in the widely used patient enablement instrument (PEI), a patient-rated measure of consultation outcome. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the factors that influence enablement, particularly the effect of socio-economic deprivation. The aim of the study is to assess the factors influencing patient enablement in GP consultations in areas of high and low deprivation.<p></p> <b>Methods</b> A questionnaire study was carried out on 3,044 patients attending 26 GPs (16 in areas of high socio-economic deprivation and 10 in low deprivation areas, in the west of Scotland). Patient expectation (confidence that the doctor would be able to help) was recorded prior to the consultation. PEI, GP empathy (measured by the CARE Measure), and a range of other measures and variables were recorded after the consultation. Data analysis employed multi-level modelling and multivariate analyses with the PEI as the dependant variable.<p></p> <b>Results</b> Although numerous variables showed a univariate association with patient enablement, only four factors were independently predictive after multilevel multivariate analysis; patients with multimorbidity of 3 or more long-term conditions (reflecting poor chronic general health), and those consulting about a long-standing problem had reduced enablement scores in both affluent and deprived areas. In deprived areas, emotional distress (GHQ-caseness) had an additional negative effect on enablement. Perceived GP empathy had a positive effect on enablement in both affluent and deprived areas. Maximal patient enablement was never found with low empathy.<p></p> <b>Conclusions</b> Although other factors influence patient enablement, the patients' perceptions of the doctors' empathy is of key importance in patient enablement in general practice consultations in both high and low deprivation settings

    Assessing the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure in sexual health nurses' consultations

    Get PDF
    Background: Increasingly healthcare policies emphasise the importance of person-centred, empathic care. Consequently, healthcare professionals are expected to demonstrate the ‘human’ aspects of care in training and in practice. The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure is a patient-rated measure of the interpersonal skills of healthcare practitioners. It has been widely validated for use by healthcare professionals in both primary and secondary care. This paper reports on the validity and reliability of the CARE Measure with sexual health nurses. Methods: Patient questionnaires were collected for 943 consultations with 20 sexual health nurses. Participating patients self-completed the questionnaire immediately after the encounter with the nurse. The questionnaire included the ten item CARE Measure, the Patient Enablement Index, and overall satisfaction instruments. Construct validity was assessed through Spearman’s correlation and principal component analysis. Internal consistence was assessed through Cronbach’s alpha and the inter-rater reliability through Generalisability Theory. Data were collected in 2013 in Scotland. Results: Female patients completed 68% of the questionnaires. The mean patient age was 28.8 years (standard deviation 9.8 years). Two of the 20 participating nurses withdrew from the study. Most patients (71.7%) regarded the CARE Measure items as very important to their consultation and the number of ‘not applicable’ and missing responses’ were low (2.6% and 0.1% respectively). The participating nurses had high CARE Measure scores; out of a maximum possible score of 50, the overall mean CARE measure score was 47.8 (standard deviation 4.4). The scores were moderately correlated with patient enablement (rho = 0.232, p = 0.001) and overall satisfaction (rho = 0.377, p = 0.001. Cronbach’s alpha showed the measure’s high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.95), but the inter-rater reliability could not be calculated due to the high achieved CARE Measure scores that varied little between nurses. Conclusions: Within this clinical context the CARE Measure has high perceived relevance and face validity. The findings support construct validity and some evidence of reliability. The high CARE Measure scores may have been due to sample bias. A future study which ensures a representative sample of patients on a larger group of nurses is required to determine whether the measure can discriminate between nurses

    A qualitative study of patients' views on quality of primary care consultations in Hong Kong and comparison with the UK CARE Measure

    Get PDF
    <b>Background</b> Patients' priorities and views on quality care are well-documented in Western countries but there is a dearth of research in this area in the East. The aim of the present study was to explore Chinese patients' views on quality of primary care consultations in Hong Kong and to compare these with the items in the CARE measure (a process measure of consultation quality widely used in the UK) in order to assess the potential utility of the CARE measure in a Chinese population.<p></p> <b>Methods</b> Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted on 21 adult patients from 3 different primary care clinics (a public primary healthcare clinic, a University health centre, and a private family physician's clinic). Topics discussed included expectations, experiences, and views about quality of medical consultations. Interviews were typed verbatim, and a thematic approach was taken to identify key issues. These identified issues were then compared with the ten CARE measure items, using a CARE framework: Connecting (Care Measure items 1–3), Assessing (item 4), Responding (items 5,6), and Empowering (items 7–10).<p></p> <b>Results</b> Patients judged doctors in terms of both the process of the consultation and the perceived outcomes. Themes identified that related to the interpersonal process of the consultation fitted well under the CARE framework; Connecting and communicating (18/21 patients), Assessing holistically (10/21 patients), Responding (18/21 patients) and Empowering (19/21 patients). Patients from the public clinic, who were generally of lower socio-economic status, were least likely to expect holistic care or empowerment. Two-thirds of patients also judged doctors on whether they performed an adequate physical examination, and three-quarters on the later outcomes of consultation (in terms of relief or cure and/or side-effects of prescribed drugs).<p></p> <b>Conclusion</b> These findings suggest that Chinese patients in Hong Kong value engaged, empathic primary care doctors and judge the quality of consultations largely on these human skills and the attitudes and values that underpin them, as well as on the perceived outcomes of treatment. The match between themes relating to consultation process and the CARE Measure items suggests utility of this measure in this population, but further quantitative validation is required

    Chronic migraine, comorbidity and socioeconomic deprivation: cross-sectional analysis of a large nationally representative primary care database

    Get PDF
    Background: Chronic migraine is common but there is limited knowledge on associated comorbidities. Objectives: To examine mental and physical comorbidities in chronic migraine and the influence of socioeconomic status in a large, nationally representative dataset. Design: Analysis of cross-sectional primary healthcare data from 1,468,404 adults in Scotland. Chronic migraine, 31 other physical conditions, and seven mental health conditions we examined. Prevalence rates were standardized by age groups, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation, and adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated for those with chronic migraine compared with those without. Results: Chronic migraine patients had more conditions, with the biggest difference found for five or more conditions (chronic migraine 11.7% vs. controls 4.9%; aOR 3.00; 95% CI 2.78–3.22). Twenty-five of the 31 physical conditions were significantly more prevalent in the chronic migraine group. The biggest difference was for chronic pain (aOR 4.33; 95% CI 4.12–4.55). For mental health conditions, the biggest differences were for anxiety (aOR 2.95; 95% CI 2.76–31.5) and depression (aOR 2.94; 95% CI 2.81–3.08). Increasing deprivation was associated with more severe and complex comorbidity (five or more conditions), and with more combined mental and physical comorbidity in the chronic migraine group. Conclusions: In a large nationally representative sample in primary care, comorbidity was most common in those with chronic migraine compared with standardized controls, and this was exacerbated by living in areas of higher deprivation

    The Association of Types of Training and Practice Settings with Doctors’ Empathy and Patient Enablement among Patients with Chronic Illness in Hong Kong

    Get PDF
    Background The increase in non-communicable disease (NCD) is becoming a global health problem and there is an increasing need for primary care doctors to look after these patients although whether family doctors are adequately trained and prepared is unknown. Objective This study aimed to determine if doctors with family medicine (FM) training are associated with enhanced empathy in consultation and enablement for patients with chronic illness as compared to doctors with internal medicine training or without any postgraduate training in different clinic settings. Methods This was a cross-sectional questionnaire survey using the validated Chinese version of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure as well as Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) for evaluation of quality and outcome of care. 14 doctors from hospital specialist clinics (7 with family medicine training, and 7 with internal medicine training) and 13 doctors from primary care clinics (7 with family medicine training, and 6 without specialist training) were recruited. In total, they consulted 823 patients with chronic illness. The CARE Measure and PEI scores were compared amongst doctors in these clinics with different training background: family medicine training, internal medicine training and those without specialist training. Generalized estimation equation (GEE) was used to account for cluster effects of patients nested with doctors. Results Within similar clinic settings, FM trained doctors had higher CARE score than doctors with no FM training. In hospital clinics, the difference of the mean CARE score for doctors who had family medicine training (39.2, SD = 7.04) and internal medicine training (35.5, SD = 8.92) was statistically significant after adjusting for consultation time and gender of the patient. In the community care clinics, the mean CARE score for doctors with family medicine training and those without specialist training were 32.1 (SD = 7.95) and 29.2 (SD = 7.43) respectively, but the difference was not found to be significant. For PEI, patients receiving care from doctors in the hospital clinics scored significantly higher than those in the community clinics, but there was no significant difference in PEI between patients receiving care from doctors with different training backgrounds within similar clinic setting. Conclusion Family medicine training was associated with higher patient perceived empathy for chronic illness patients in the hospital clinics. Patient enablement appeared to be associated with clinic settings but not doctors' training background. Training in family medicine and a clinic environment that enables more patient doctor time might help in enhancing doctors' empathy and enablement for chronic illness patients.published_or_final_versio

    General practitioners' patient-centredness and responses to patients' emotional cues and concerns: relationships with perceived empathy in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation

    Get PDF
    <b>Background</b> Physician empathy is important to patients across the socio-economic spectrum. However, whether socioeconomic status (SES) influences how patients’ judge physician empathy is not known. We investigated how patients’ perceptions of their general practitioners’ (GPs) empathy related to objectively measured patient-centeredness of the GPs and their detection and response to emotional cues.<p></p> <b>Methods</b> Secondary analysis of 112 videoed consultations of 8 GPs with the high and low empathy scores as rated by patients using the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure working in high or low deprivation settings in Scotland. Objective assessment involved the Measure of Patient-Centredness (MPCC) which has 3 components (exploring disease and illness experience, understanding the whole person, and finding common ground) and the Verona coding system (which measures emotional cues, concerns and responses).<p></p> <b>Results</b> GPs rated by patients as being empathic were more patient-centred overall than those rated as less empathic, in both high (p = 0.03) and low deprivation areas (p = 0.05). In high deprivation areas, perceived empathy was related to finding common ground (p = 0.02) whereas in low deprivation areas it was related to understanding the whole person (p= 0.01). In high deprivation areas, empathic GPs also had significantly different responses to emotional cues and concerns than GPs perceived as having low empathy.<p></p> <b>Conclusion</b> Socioeconomic status appears to affect how patients judge practitioner empathy. This study emphasises the importance of finding common ground and detecting and responding actively to emotional cues in consultations in high deprivation areas. Further research on a larger sample is warranted

    Impact of educational attainment on the association between social class at birth and multimorbidity in middle age in the Aberdeen Children of the 1950s cohort study

    Get PDF
    Objective Multimorbidity (the co-existence of two or more health conditions) is increasingly prevalent. No long-term cohort study has examined the impact of contemporaneously measured birth social class and educational attainment upon adult self-reported multimorbidity. We investigated the impact of educational attainment on the relationship between social class at birth and adult self-reported multimorbidity in the Aberdeen Children of the 1950s (ACONF) cohort. Methods A prospective cohort study using the ACONF cohort. ACONF included 12,150 individuals born in Aberdeen, Scotland 1950-1956. In 2001, 7,184 (64%) responded to a questionnaire providing information including self-reported morbidity and educational attainment. The exposure was father’s social class at birth from birth records and the outcome was self-reported multimorbidity. Logistic regression assessed the association between social class and multimorbidity with adjustment for gender, then by educational attainment and finally by childhood cognition and secondary school type. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals were presented. Results Of 7,184 individuals (mean age 48, 52% female), 5.4% reported multimorbidity. Birth social class was associated with adult multimorbidity. For example the OR of multimorbidity adjusted by gender was 0.62 (95% CI 0.39-1.00) in the highest social class group (I/II) in relation to the reference group (III (manual)) and was 1.85 (95% CI 1.19-2.88) in the lowest social class group. This was partially attenuated in all social class categories by educational attainment, for example the OR was 0.74 (95% CI 0.45-1.21) in group I/II following adjustment. Conclusion Lower social class at birth was associated with developing multimorbidity in middle age. This was partially mediated by educational attainment and future research should consider identifying the other explanatory variables. The results are relevant to researchers and to those aiming to reduce the impact of multimorbidity

    Defining and measuring multimorbidity: a systematic review of systematic reviews

    Get PDF
    Background Multimorbidity, the coexistence of multiple health conditions, is a growing public health challenge. Research and intervention development are hampered by the lack of consensus regarding defining and measuring multimorbidity. The aim of this systematic review was to pool the findings of systematic reviews examining definitions and measures of multimorbidity. Methods Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane were searched from database inception to February 2017. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts and extracted data from the included papers. Disagreements were resolved with a third author. Reviews were quality assessed. Results Of six reviews, two focussed on definitions and four on measures. Multimorbidity was commonly defined as the presence of multiple diseases or conditions, often with a cut-off of two or more. One review developed a holistic definition including biopsychosocial and somatic factors as well as disease. Reviews recommended using measures validated for the outcome of interest. Disease counts are an alternative if no validated measure exists. Conclusions To enable comparison between studies and settings, researchers and practitioners should be explicit about their choice of definition and measure. Using a cut-off of two or more conditions as part of the definition is widely adopted. Measure selection should be based on tools validated for the outcome being considered. Where there is no validated measure, or where multiple outcomes or populations are being considered, disease counts are appropriate

    The Patient Enablement Instrument-French version in a family practice setting: a reliability study

    Get PDF
    Background: Patient enablement can be defined as the extent to which a patient is capable of understanding and coping with his or her health issues. This concept is linked to a number of health outcomes such as self-management of chronic diseases and quality of life. The Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) was designed to measure this concept after a medical consultation. The instrument, in its original form and its translations into several languages, has proven to be reliable and valid. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the French version of the PEI (PEI-Fv) in a family practice setting. Methods: One hundred and ten participants were recruited in a family medicine clinic in the Saguenay region of Quebec (Canada). The PEI-Fv was completed twice, immediately after consultation with a physician (T1) and 2 weeks after the consultation (T2). The internal consistency of the tool was assessed with Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: The mean score for the PEI-Fv was 5.06 ± 3.97 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.30-5.81) at T1 and 4.63 ± 3.90 (95% CI: 3.82-5.44) at T2. Cronbach's α was high at T1 (α1 = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.95) and T2 (α2 = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.95). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.48-0.74), indicating a moderate test-retest reliability. Conclusions: The internal consistency of the PEI-Fv is excellent. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good. Test-retest reliability should be examined in further studies at a less than 2-week interval to reduce maturation bias. This instrument can be used to measure enablement after consultation in a French-speaking family practice setting

    Homeopathy – what are the active ingredients? An exploratory study using the UK Medical Research Council's framework for the evaluation of complex interventions

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Research in homeopathy has traditionally addressed itself to defining the effectiveness of homeopathic potencies in comparison to placebo medication. There is now increasing awareness that the homeopathic consultation is in itself a therapeutic intervention working independently or synergistically with the prescribed remedy. Our objective was to identify and evalute potential "active ingredients" of the homeopathic approach as a whole, in a prospective formal case series, which draws on actual consultation data, and is based on the MRC framework for the evaluation of complex interventions. METHODS: Following on from a theoretical review of how homeopathic care might mediate its effects, 18 patients were prospectively recruited to a case series based at Bristol Homeopathic Hospital. Patients, who lived with one of three index conditions, were interviewed before and after a five visit "package of care". All consultations were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Additional data, including generic and condition-specific questionnaires, artwork and "significant other" reports were collected. Textual data was subject to thematic analysis and triangulated with other sources. RESULTS: We judged that around one third of patients had experienced a major improvement in their health over the study period, a third had some improvement and a third had no improvement. Putative active ingredients included the patients' "openness to the mind-body connection", consultational empathy, in-depth enquiry into bodily complaints, disclosure, the remedy matching process and, potentially, the homeopathic remedies themselves. CONCLUSION: This study has has identified, using primary consultation and other data, a range of factors that might account for the effectiveness of homeopathic care. Some of these, such as empathy, are non-specific. Others, such as the remedy matching process, are specific to homeopathy. These findings counsel against the use of placebo-controlled RCT designs in which both arms would potentially be receiving specific active ingredients. Future research in homeopathy should focus on pragmatic trials and seek to confirm or refute the therapeutic role of constructs such as patient "openness", disclosure and homeopathicity
    corecore