Differences in patient-physician communication between the emergency department and other departments in a hospital setting in Taiwan.
Continuing medical education
Emergency department
Patient-physician communication
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Nov 2023
20 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
13
06
2022
accepted:
09
11
2023
medline:
27
11
2023
pubmed:
21
11
2023
entrez:
21
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Communication fosters trust and understanding between patients and physicians, and specific communication steps help to build relationships. Communication in the emergency department may be different from that in other departments due to differences in medical purposes and treatments. However, the characteristics of communication in the clinical settings of various departments have not been explored nor compared. This study aimed to construct the steps in patient-physician communication based on the Roter Communication Model and compare communication performance between the emergency department and three other clinical settings-internal medicine, surgery, and family medicine departments. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adopted. First, in-depth interviews were used to analyze clinical communication steps and meanings. Then, a quantitative questionnaire was designed based on the interview results to investigate differences in communication between the emergency department and the other three departments. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed from 20 interviews and 98 valid questionnaires. Patient-physician communication consists of four steps and ten factors. The four steps-greeting and data gathering, patient education and counseling, facilitation and patient activation, and building a relationship-had significant progressive effects. Patient education and counseling had an additional significant effect on building a relationship. The emergency department performed less well in the facilitation and patient activation, building a relationship step and the evaluation method, enhancement method, and attitude factors than the other departments. To improve the quality of patient-physician communication in the emergency department, physicians should strengthen the steps of facilitation and patient activation to encourage patients' active engagement in their health care.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Communication fosters trust and understanding between patients and physicians, and specific communication steps help to build relationships. Communication in the emergency department may be different from that in other departments due to differences in medical purposes and treatments. However, the characteristics of communication in the clinical settings of various departments have not been explored nor compared.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to construct the steps in patient-physician communication based on the Roter Communication Model and compare communication performance between the emergency department and three other clinical settings-internal medicine, surgery, and family medicine departments.
METHODS
METHODS
Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adopted. First, in-depth interviews were used to analyze clinical communication steps and meanings. Then, a quantitative questionnaire was designed based on the interview results to investigate differences in communication between the emergency department and the other three departments. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed from 20 interviews and 98 valid questionnaires.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Patient-physician communication consists of four steps and ten factors. The four steps-greeting and data gathering, patient education and counseling, facilitation and patient activation, and building a relationship-had significant progressive effects. Patient education and counseling had an additional significant effect on building a relationship. The emergency department performed less well in the facilitation and patient activation, building a relationship step and the evaluation method, enhancement method, and attitude factors than the other departments.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
To improve the quality of patient-physician communication in the emergency department, physicians should strengthen the steps of facilitation and patient activation to encourage patients' active engagement in their health care.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37986078
doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-10311-2
pii: 10.1186/s12913-023-10311-2
pmc: PMC10662510
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1279Subventions
Organisme : National Science and Technology Council
ID : MOST 110-2511-H-303-001
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2003 Jan-Mar;8(1):35-7
pubmed: 12715405
Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Sep;44(3):262-7
pubmed: 15332069
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Jun;17(6):490-7
pubmed: 27058750
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Jan 16;13:22
pubmed: 23320786
Acad Med. 2001 Apr;76(4):390-3
pubmed: 11299158
Int J Pharm Pract. 2010 Jun;18(3):141-8
pubmed: 20509347
Pak J Med Sci. 2018 Jul-Aug;34(4):999-1003
pubmed: 30190769
Indian J Med Ethics. 2015 Jul-Sep;12(3):141-8
pubmed: 26228046
Patient Educ Couns. 2002 Apr;46(4):243-51
pubmed: 11932123
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 7;12(2):e0170988
pubmed: 28170443
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 May;83(2):185-94
pubmed: 21459254
Health Commun. 2001;13(1):33-48
pubmed: 11370921
Mater Sociomed. 2017 Sep;29(3):192-195
pubmed: 29109665
J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Jul;15(7):509-13
pubmed: 10940139
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Sep 5;19(1):338
pubmed: 31488118
J Fam Pract. 2001 Dec;50(12):1057-62
pubmed: 11742607
BMJ. 2002 Sep 28;325(7366):682-3
pubmed: 12351359
Int J Pharm Pract. 2022 Jan 7;30(1):17-27
pubmed: 34741506
J Gen Intern Med. 2002 Jan;17(1):79-81
pubmed: 11903779
Acad Emerg Med. 2013 May;20(5):441-8
pubmed: 23672357
Gerontologist. 2009 Jun;49(3):418-27
pubmed: 19372143
Ann Surg. 2015 Jan;261(1):2-8
pubmed: 24887985
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Jul 14;168(13):1387-95
pubmed: 18625918
Int J Emerg Med. 2015 Dec;8(1):48
pubmed: 26667242