Patient centred consultation, satisfaction and young patients: A cross-country analysis

A systematic scoping review of patient and caregiver self-report measures of satisfaction with clinicians' communication

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic scoping review of self-report tools used to measure patient and/or caregiver satisfaction with clinician communication. Aims included identifying: 1) instruments that have been used to measure communication satisfaction, and 2) content of the communication items on measures.

METHODS

Two databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched for relevant studies. Eligibility included patient or caregiver self-report tools assessing satisfaction with clinicians' communication in a biomedical healthcare setting; and the stated purpose for using the measurement involved evaluating communication satisfaction and measures included more than one question about this. All data were charted in a form created by the authors.

RESULTS

Our search yielded a total of 4531 results screened as title and abstracts; 228 studies were screened in full text and 85 studies were included in the review. We found 53 different tools used to measure communication satisfaction among those 85 studies, including 29 previously used measures (e.g., FS-ICU-24, CAHPS), and 24 original measures developed by authors. Content of communication satisfaction items included satisfaction with content-specific communication, interpersonal communication skills of clinicians, communicating to set the right environment, and global communication satisfaction items.

CONCLUSION

There was high variability in the number of items and types of content on measures. Communication satisfaction should be better conceptualized to improve measurement, and more robust measures should be created to capture complex factors of communication satisfaction.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Creating a rigorous evaluation of satisfaction with clinician communication may help strengthen communication research and the assessment of communication interventions.

Self‐reported factors for improving patient's dental care: A pilot study

Objectives

Patient‐centered approach can offer valuable information in improving dental care, but literature is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate self‐reported factors beneficial for attendance in dental care.

Material and Methods

Survey data were collected during the summer of 2020 comprising both structured questionnaires and an open question on factors considered beneficial for dental attendance. Voluntary patients over 15 years of age (n = 196, 98%) agreed to fill the questionnaires, and n = 112 of them (57%) also gave open commentary in an urgent dental care clinic, City of Oulu, Finland, comprising the study population. Dental fear was assessed by Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) sum scores (min 5, max 25). All utterances (n = 181) on an open question were evaluated by inductive content analysis to create sub‐ and main categories. Covid‐19 pandemic case counts in Finland were low at the time of the survey, but their effect on seeking dental care was asked. The distribution of patients was evaluated by cross‐tabulation, considering their age, gender, and dental fear status; the significance level was p < .05.

Results

Females dominated slightly the study population (57%). The mean age of the respondents was 44 years. Half (50%) had moderate (MDAS score 10−18), and 10% had severe dental fear (≥19). The open responses could be categorized into four main categories. The largest main category by patient count concerned factors related to personnel (29%), followed by the patient (28%) and treatment (25%) related, and administrative factors (19%). Males chose factors falling into categories of administration and treatment while females chose patient and personnel‐related factors (p = .048). Compared to the rest, fearful persons (MDAS > 9) reported more often factors related to personnel and treatment (p = .03). Of all participants, 17% reported seeking less dental care during the pandemic.

Conclusions

Patients value dental personnel and treatment‐related factors, specifically those with fear.

Influence of Risk of Drug⁻Drug Interactions and Time Availability on Patient Trust, Satisfaction, and Cooperation with Clinical Pharmacists

Patients with multiple diseases requiring several medications often face the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Such patients need more care and services from clinical pharmacists. Given the importance of this issue in clinical medicine, the present study aims to investigate how DDIs and time availability affect patient trust in clinical pharmacists and how patient trust influences patient satisfaction and cooperation between patients and clinical pharmacists. Sample data of 741 patients in central Taiwan hospitals were analyzed, and the results of structural equation modeling showed that DDIs and time availability positively affect patient trust, which, in turn, positively influenced patient satisfaction and cooperation between patients and clinical pharmacists. Overall, the results indicated that patient satisfaction is an important predictor of cooperation between patients and clinical pharmacists.