PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Eric Vingerhoets

Publications and source records attributed to Eric Vingerhoets.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Feedback based on patient evaluations: a tool for quality improvement?

Feedback regarding patient evaluations of health care is expected to be a tool for quality improvement. This study examined the response of general practitioners to such feedback in a randomised trial. Practitioners in the intervention group read and discussed the feedback report and then reported on a range of actions that can be undertaken to improve the quality of care. Their communication behaviour was not found to change. All of the practitioners were highly motivated to learn from patient views, both at baseline and after the intervention period. Compared to the control group, the practitioners in the intervention group had less favourable views of the relevance of patient feedback for their practice after the receipt of such feedback. Furthermore, these practitioners felt that a patient survey required considerable time and energy and saw little reason for change. Although patient feedback can help identify areas for improvement, specific barriers must be addressed before such feedback can be put to more widespread use.

Adult↗

Deconstructing patient centred communication and uncovering shared decision making: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patient centred communication (PCC) has been described as a method for doctor-patient communication. The principles of shared decision making (SDM) have been proposed more recently. AIMS: This study aimed to examine PCC and SDM empirically with respect to their mutual association, the variation in practitioners' working styles, and the associations with patient characteristics. METHODS: Sixty general practitioners recruited 596 adult patients who gave written consent to have their consultations videotaped. The tapes were assessed by two researchers, using a standardised instrument for global communication. For the purpose of this exploratory study, scales for PCC and SDM were based on subsamples of items in the MAAS. RESULTS: The scales for PCC and SDM were weakly associated (Pearson correlation: 0.25). Physicians varied more on SDM than on PCC. The intracluster correlation of the PCC and SDM scales were, respectively, 0.34 and 0.19. However, hypotheses regarding associations with patient characteristics were not confirmed. Neither PCC nor SDM scores were related to patient gender, education, age, functional health status or existence of chronic conditions. CONCLUSION: The study provides evidence that PCC and SDM can be differentiated and comprise approaches to communication between clinicians and patients which may be more clearly distinguished by further focused research and training developments.

Adult↗