The Measurement of Empathy in a Clinical and a Non-clinical Setting

Finding Echoes: An Exploration of Empathy Among Physiotherapists and Physiotherapy Students in Singapore

Background

Empathy is an essential antecedent in motivating healthcare professionals to treat and care for their patients with compassion – few studies had explored empathy on healthcare workers. Currently, no data reported empathy amongst physiotherapists and physiotherapy students in Singapore.

Objectives

This study aims to: 1) measure and explore within- and between-group differences in empathy scores amongst physiotherapists and physiotherapy students in Singapore, and 2) compare the results with similar studies locally and overseas.

Methods

This cross-sectional survey recruited 187 participants (37 physiotherapists and 150 physiotherapy students) via convenience sampling. Participants completed the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) Health Professions (JSE-HP) and the JSE-Health Professions Students (JSE-HPS), correspondingly. The 20-item JSE-HP and JSE-HPS are validated self-reported questionnaires that measure clinical empathy using a 7-point Likert scale. Summed scores range from 20 to 140, with higher scores suggesting a higher level of empathy. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, independent-sample t-tests and one-way analyses of variance.

Results

The mean score of JSE-HP and JSE-HPS was 110.89±11.37 and 112.43±10.73, respectively. No statistically significant differences found between gender, physiotherapists and physiotherapy students, and years of study. However, physiotherapists scored significantly higher [5.08±1.24 (95% CI 4.67–5.49) vs 4.01±1.36 (95% CI 3.79–4.23), p < .001 ] in the JSE components ‘Walking in Patient's Shoes’.

Conclusion

Physiotherapists and physiotherapy students in Singapore have similar empathy scores to their counterparts locally and internationally. No statistically significant differences in empathy scores were found. However, physiotherapy students were less able to understand patients' perspectives. This warrants further exploration in developing this vital attribute amongst students.

Is empathy an important attribute of midwives and other health professionals?: A review

INTRODUCTION

This paper is a report of a systematic review to identify and analyze studies of the measurement of empathy in midwives and other health professionals. Empathy has been recognized as an important factor in patient care, with positive outcomes for both patients and health professionals. There is a debate on the definition of empathy, on its measurement and on the possibility of improvement.

METHODS

Searches were made of the CINAHL, SCOPUS, PubMed and PsychINFO databases using the terms empathy, clinical, midwifery, nursing, medical students, measurement, and health professionals, singly or in combination, to identify literature published in English between 2002-2015. The included papers were critically reviewed and a narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

In all, 22 papers met the inclusion criteria by studies that were conducted to measure the levels of empathy in a variety of health professionals and students. Their scores were analyzed in correlation with their sociodemographic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite numerous studies, many correlations but also differences exist, indicating the complexity of empathy and the need to further study it.

Differences between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient-perceived empathy: a cross-sectional study in primary care

BACKGROUND

Empathy has positive effects on a range of healthcare outcomes. It is therefore an important skill for a GP. However, the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient perception of GP empathic communication during consultations is still unclear.

AIM

To investigate the correlation between GP perception of delivered empathy and patient-perceived empathy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional study in primary care in the Netherlands, between December 2016 and February 2017.

METHOD

GPs and their patients were asked to fill in an empathy questionnaire directly after a consultation. Patient perception of received empathy during the consultation was measured through the Dutch version of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) questionnaire. GP perception of delivered empathy during the consultation was measured with an adapted version of the CARE questionnaire.

RESULTS

The authors obtained questionnaires from 147 consultations by 34 different GPs in 16 primary care practices. A total of 143 consultations were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Mean patient-perceived empathy score was significantly higher than mean GPs' empathy score (42.1, range 20.0 to 50.0 and 31.6, range 24.0 to 41.0, respectively, P<0.0001). Furthermore, a low correlation (r = 0.06) was found between GP empathy score and patient-perceived empathy score.

CONCLUSION

GPs rate the delivered empathy during consultations consistently and significantly lower than their patients experience empathy during consultations. Moreover, GPs' impressions of the empathy delivered during the consultation do not predict the actual amount of empathy perceived by their patients. Patients experience a great deal of empathy during their clinical encounter. GPs' self-reports on empathy delivered gives an inaccurate reflection, and underestimates patient-perceived empathy.