在手外科诊所就诊期间错过共情机会

The Hand Pub Date : 2019-09-17 DOI:10.1177/1558944719873395
Bastiaan T. van Hoorn, M. Menendez, M. Mackert, E. Donovan, M. van Heijl, D. Ring
{"title":"在手外科诊所就诊期间错过共情机会","authors":"Bastiaan T. van Hoorn, M. Menendez, M. Mackert, E. Donovan, M. van Heijl, D. Ring","doi":"10.1177/1558944719873395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Empathy (conveyance of an understanding of a patient’s situation, perspective, and feelings) deepens the therapeutic alliance and leads to better health outcomes. We studied the frequency and nature of empathic opportunities and physician responses in patients visiting a hand surgeon. We also sought patient characteristics associated with the number of patient-initiated-clues and missed opportunities by surgeons. Methods: For this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 83 new, adult patients visiting 1 of 3 hand surgeons during a period of 4 months. All visits were audio-recorded, and empathic opportunities (patient-initiated emotional or social clues) and physician responses were categorized using the model of Levenson et al. Before the visit, patients completed the Newest Vital Sign health literacy test; 3 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-based questionnaires: Upper-Extremity function, Pain Interference, and Depression questionnaires; and a sociodemographic survey. Results: Empathic opportunities were present in 70% of hand surgery office visits. Surgeons responded empathically to about half of the opportunities. Patients with limited health literacy and greater symptoms of depression (small correlation; r = −0.29) were less likely to receive a positive response. Response to an empathic opportunity did not affect visit duration. Conclusions: Hand surgeons often miss empathic opportunities. Future research might address the influence of training physicians to address empathic opportunities on trust, adherence, satisfaction, and outcomes.","PeriodicalId":76630,"journal":{"name":"The Hand","volume":"16 1","pages":"698 - 705"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1558944719873395","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Missed Empathic Opportunities During Hand Surgery Office Visits\",\"authors\":\"Bastiaan T. van Hoorn, M. Menendez, M. Mackert, E. Donovan, M. van Heijl, D. Ring\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1558944719873395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Empathy (conveyance of an understanding of a patient’s situation, perspective, and feelings) deepens the therapeutic alliance and leads to better health outcomes. We studied the frequency and nature of empathic opportunities and physician responses in patients visiting a hand surgeon. We also sought patient characteristics associated with the number of patient-initiated-clues and missed opportunities by surgeons. Methods: For this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 83 new, adult patients visiting 1 of 3 hand surgeons during a period of 4 months. All visits were audio-recorded, and empathic opportunities (patient-initiated emotional or social clues) and physician responses were categorized using the model of Levenson et al. Before the visit, patients completed the Newest Vital Sign health literacy test; 3 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-based questionnaires: Upper-Extremity function, Pain Interference, and Depression questionnaires; and a sociodemographic survey. Results: Empathic opportunities were present in 70% of hand surgery office visits. Surgeons responded empathically to about half of the opportunities. Patients with limited health literacy and greater symptoms of depression (small correlation; r = −0.29) were less likely to receive a positive response. Response to an empathic opportunity did not affect visit duration. Conclusions: Hand surgeons often miss empathic opportunities. Future research might address the influence of training physicians to address empathic opportunities on trust, adherence, satisfaction, and outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Hand\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"698 - 705\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1558944719873395\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Hand\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944719873395\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Hand","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1558944719873395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景:同理心(传达对患者情况、观点和感受的理解)加深了治疗联盟,并带来更好的健康结果。我们研究了在拜访手外科医生的患者中,移情机会和医生反应的频率和性质。我们还寻求了与患者提出的线索数量和外科医生错过的机会数量相关的患者特征。方法:在这项前瞻性队列研究中,我们招募了83名新的成年患者,他们在4个月的时间里访问了三分之一的手外科医生。所有就诊都进行了音频记录,并使用Levenson等人的模型对移情机会(患者引发的情绪或社会线索)和医生的反应进行了分类。在就诊前,患者完成了最新生命体征健康素养测试;3基于患者报告结果测量信息系统的问卷:上肢功能、疼痛干扰和抑郁问卷;以及社会人口调查。结果:70%的手外科办公室就诊都有移情机会。外科医生对大约一半的机会感同身受。健康素养有限且抑郁症状更严重的患者(相关性较小;r=-0.29)不太可能得到积极反应。对移情机会的反应不会影响访视时间。结论:手外科医生经常错过移情的机会。未来的研究可能会解决培训医生以解决移情机会对信任、依从性、满意度和结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Missed Empathic Opportunities During Hand Surgery Office Visits
Background: Empathy (conveyance of an understanding of a patient’s situation, perspective, and feelings) deepens the therapeutic alliance and leads to better health outcomes. We studied the frequency and nature of empathic opportunities and physician responses in patients visiting a hand surgeon. We also sought patient characteristics associated with the number of patient-initiated-clues and missed opportunities by surgeons. Methods: For this prospective cohort study, we enrolled 83 new, adult patients visiting 1 of 3 hand surgeons during a period of 4 months. All visits were audio-recorded, and empathic opportunities (patient-initiated emotional or social clues) and physician responses were categorized using the model of Levenson et al. Before the visit, patients completed the Newest Vital Sign health literacy test; 3 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-based questionnaires: Upper-Extremity function, Pain Interference, and Depression questionnaires; and a sociodemographic survey. Results: Empathic opportunities were present in 70% of hand surgery office visits. Surgeons responded empathically to about half of the opportunities. Patients with limited health literacy and greater symptoms of depression (small correlation; r = −0.29) were less likely to receive a positive response. Response to an empathic opportunity did not affect visit duration. Conclusions: Hand surgeons often miss empathic opportunities. Future research might address the influence of training physicians to address empathic opportunities on trust, adherence, satisfaction, and outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Monteggia Fracture Outcomes: Acute to Chronic. Outcomes in Ballistic Injuries to the Hand: Fractures and Nerve/Tendon Damage as Predictors of Poor Outcomes. Predictors of Digital Amputation in Diabetic Patients With Surgically Treated Finger Infections. The Prevalence of Depression and PTSD in Adults With Surgically Managed Traumatic Upper-Extremity Amputations. Postoperative Functional Analysis of Double Crush Versus Single Peripheral Nerve Decompression: A Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1