PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ronald M Epstein

Publications and source records attributed to Ronald M Epstein.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Influences on patients' ratings of physicians: Physicians demographics and personality.

OBJECTIVE: There is considerable interest in the influences on patients' ratings of physicians. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, patients (n = 4616; age range: 18-65 years) rated their level of satisfaction with their primary care physicians (n = 96). Patients and physicians were recruited from primary care practices in the Rochester, NY metropolitan area. For analytic purposes, length of the patient-physician relationship was stratified (< or =1, 1-4, > or =5 years). Principal components factor analysis of items from the Health Care Climate Questionnaire, the Primary Care Assessment Survey and the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire yielded a single factor labeled "Satisfaction" that served as the sole dependent variable. Higher scores mean greater satisfaction. Predictors of interest were patient demographics and morbidity as well as physician demographics and personality, assessed with items from the NEO-FFI. RESULTS: Patients treated by a physician for 1 year or less rated male physicians higher than female physicians. This gender difference disappeared after 1 year, but two physician personality traits, Openness and Conscientiousness, were associated with patients' ratings in lengthier patient-physician relationships. Patients report being more satisfied with physicians who are relatively high in Openness and average in Conscientiousness. Older patients provide higher ratings than younger patients, and those with greater medical burden rated their physicians higher. CONCLUSION: Patients' ratings of physicians are multidetermined. Future research on patient satisfaction and the doctor-patient relationship would benefit from a consideration of physician personality. Identifying physician personality traits that facilitate or undermine communication, trust, patient-centeredness, and patient adherence to prescribed treatments is an important priority. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Learning environments could be created to reinforce certain traits and corresponding habits of mind that enhance patient satisfaction. Such a shift in the culture of medical education and practice could have implications for patient care.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Making communication research matter: what do patients notice, what do patients want, and what do patients need?

OBJECTIVE: To explore limitations of current communication theory by considering different perspectives of researchers, clinicians, patients and teachers of communication. METHOD: Theory development based on limitations of the current communication research literature due to inconsistencies between patient reports and observed communication behavior. RESULTS: While researchers focus on the mechanics and techniques of communication, patients seek relationships in which they experience trust, the right amount of autonomy, caring, and expertise. Patients', physicians', and communication experts' perspectives do not always define the same problems and often point to different solutions. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to studying clinician behaviors and patient perceptions of care, communication research should focus on five additional factors: what patients notice, want and need, and how their perspectives differ from those of physicians and researchers; the context, including illness severity and type and family influences; how complex health systems facilitate and impede communication; patients' influences on physician communication behavior; and habits of mind that promote attentive care.

Assertiveness↗
PubMed2006

Connoisseurs of care? Unannounced standardized patients' ratings of physicians.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction surveys can be informative, but bias and poor response rates may limit their utility as stable measures of physician performance. Using unannounced standardized patients (SPs) may overcome some of these limitations because their experience and training make them able judges of physician behavior. OBJECTIVES: We sought to understand the reliability of unannounced SPs in rating primary care physicians when covertly presenting as real patients. STUDY DESIGN: Data from 2 studies (Patient Centered Communication [PCC]; Social Influences in Practice [SIP]) were included. For the PCC study, 5 SPs made 192 visits to 96 physicians; for the SIP study, 18 SPs made 292 visits to 146 physicians. SPs visits to physicians were randomized, thus avoiding mutual selection bias. Each SP rated 16 to 38 physicians on interpersonal skills (autonomy support: PCC, SIP), technical skills (information gathering: SIP-only), and overall satisfaction (SIP-only). We evaluated SP evaluation consistency (physician vs. total variance rho), and SPs' overall satisfaction with specific dimensions of physician performance. RESULTS: Scale reliability varied from 0.71 to 0.92. Physician rhos (95% confidence intervals) for autonomy support were 0.40 (0.22-0.58; PCC) and 0.30 (0.14-0.45; SIP); information gathering rho was 0.46 (0.33-0.59; SIP). Overall SP satisfaction rho was 0.47 (0.34-0.60; SIP). SPs varied significantly in adjusted overall satisfaction levels, but not other dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses provide some evidence that medical connoisseurship can be learned. When adequately sampled by trained SPs, some physician skills can be reliably measured in community practice settings.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2006

Do patient requests for antidepressants enhance or hinder physicians' evaluation of depression? A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to ascertain whether patients' requests for antidepressants affect visit duration or history taking by primary care physicians (PCPs) for patients with depressive symptoms and a coexisting musculoskeletal disorder and to determine whether more thorough history taking is associated with diagnostic accuracy or with provision of minimally acceptable initial care for major depression. DESIGN: This was a randomized trial using standardized patients (SPs). Six roles involved 2 conditions (major depression and adjustment disorder, both with coexisting musculoskeletal conditions) and 3 patient request types (brand-specific, general, or none). We conducted the study in 152 PCP offices in Northern California and Rochester, New York. Physicians were assigned randomly to see 2 SPs with depression/wrist pain or adjustment disorder/back pain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physician history-taking for depression and the musculoskeletal condition; depression diagnosis in the medical record; antidepressant prescriptions/samples; referral/follow-up recommendations; visit duration; and provision of minimally acceptable initial depression care. RESULTS: General antidepressant requests were associated with more depression history-taking (Adjusted Parameter Estimate = 0.80 more questions of 10 (95% confidence interval = 0.31-1.29, P < 0.001); brand-specific requests were marginally associated with more depression history-taking (Adjusted Parameter Estimate = 0.45, 95% confidence interval = -0.04-0.93, P = 0.07). Antidepressant medication requests were not related to musculo-skeletal question asking (P > 0.3) or visit length (P > 0.8). Depression history taking was directly associated with the likelihood of a chart diagnosis of depression and the provision of minimally acceptable initial depression care. CONCLUSION: General antidepressant requests increase depression history taking, including screening for suicide. Patients' requests for medication do not appear to short-circuit history taking for depression or distract the physician's attention from coexisting musculoskeletal conditions.

Adjustment Disorders↗
PubMed2006

Temporal and group-related trends in peer assessment amongst medical students.

Peer assessment has been increasingly recommended as a way to evaluate the professional competencies of medical trainees. Prior studies have only assessed single groups measured at a single timepoint. Thus, neither the longitudinal stability of such ratings nor differences between groups using the same peer-assessment instrument have been reported previously. Participants were all members of 2 consecutive classes of medical students (n = 77 and n = 85) at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry who completed Years 2 and 3 of medical school consecutively. All participants were evaluated by 6-12 classmates near the end of both Years 2 and 3. Main outcome measures were mean numerical ratings on peer-assessed scales of professional work habits (WH) and interpersonal attributes (IA). Both scales had high internal consistencies in both years (Cronbach's alpha 0.84-0.94). The IA and WH scales were moderately correlated with one another (r = 0.36 in Year 2, r = 0.28 in Year 3). Year 2 scores were predictive of Year 3 scores for both scales (WH: r = 0.64; IA; r = 0.62). Generalisability and decision analyses revealed that 1 class was consistently more discriminating with the WH scale, while the other was more discriminating with of the IA scale. Depending on the class, year and scale, the number of raters needed to achieve a reasonable reliability ranged between 7 and 28. Although Year 3 peer ratings were consistently higher than Year 2 peer ratings for both WH and IA, individual scores were highly correlated across the 2 years, despite the fact that different individuals were chosen as peer raters. Abilities appear to be stable between Years 2 and 3 of medical school. Groups may differ in their ability to discriminate different kinds of skills. Generalisability analysis can be used to discover these patterns within groups.

Education, Dental↗
PubMed2006

Effects of rater selection on peer assessment among medical students.

CONTEXT: Although peer-assessment appears promising as a method to assess interpersonal skills among medical students, results may be biased by method of peer selection, particularly if different kinds of classmates are assigned systematically by different methods. It is also unclear whether students with lower interpersonal skills may be more negative towards their classmates than students with higher levels of interpersonal skills and, if so, how much bias this may introduce into the results of peer assessment. It is also unclear whether low-rated students are more likely to ask to rate one another. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 296 medical students from the classes of 2004, 2005 and 2006 at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry. All participants were evaluated by between 6 and 12 classmates near the end of both their second and third years. In some classes peer-raters were assigned from class lists, while in other classes students were asked to recommend classmates to rate and be rated by. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean numerical ratings of interpersonal-attributes scores received from peers, compared with mean scores simultaneously assigned to peers. We also examined students' selection of peer-raters, as well as scores received by their peer-raters. RESULTS: For all 3 classes in both second and third years, students in the lowest quartile of received scores were significantly more likely to simultaneously assign lower scores to their peers. Among third-year students, such low-scoring students were significantly more likely to ask to rate and be rated by other low-scoring students. Among third-year students, low-rated students were more likely to rate and be rated by other low-rated students, irrespective of how rater assignments are made. Most students who were originally in the lowest quartile of received scores remained so after removing the scores assigned by low-rated raters. Among pre-clinical second-year students, however, low-rated students were no more likely than high-rated students to be rated by other low-rated students. CONCLUSION: Students with low levels of peer-assessed interpersonal attributes are more negative in their judgements of classmates. Third-year medical students with low levels of interpersonal attributes are more likely to be rated by other students with low levels of interpersonal attributes, irrespective of method of rater assignment. This effect was not seen in the second year of medical school. Biases in selection of raters among third-year students, however, do not appear to affect the results of peer assessment. Thus, medical schools that choose to institute peer assessment can select the method of peer-rater assignment based on practicality and logistical considerations. Students' affiliations with one another in the third year appear to be related to peer-assessed interpersonal attributes.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2006

What drives referral from primary care physicians to mental health specialists? A randomized trial using actors portraying depressive symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Referral from primary care to the mental health specialty sector is important but poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: Identify physician characteristics influencing mental health referral. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial using Standardized Patients (SPs). SETTING: Offices of primary care physicians in 3 cities. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty-two family physicians and general internists recruited from 4 broad practice settings; 18 middle aged Caucasian female actors. INTERVENTION: Two hundred and ninety-eight unannounced SP visits, with assignments constrained so physicians saw 1 SP with major depression and 1 with adjustment disorder. MEASUREMENTS: Mental health referrals via SP written reports; physician and system characteristics through a self-administered physician questionnaire. RESULTS: Among 298 SP visits, 107 (36%) resulted in mental health referral. Referrals were less likely among physicians with greater self-confidence in their ability to manage antidepressant therapy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17 to 0.86) and were more likely if physicians typically spent > or =10% of professional time on nonclinical activities (AOR 3.42, 95% CI 1.45 to 8.07), had personal life experience with psychotherapy for depression (AOR 2.74, 95% CI 1.15 to 6.52), or usually had access to mental health consultation within 2 weeks (AOR 2.94, 95% CI 1.26 to 6.92). LIMITATION: The roles portrayed by SPs may not reflect the experience of a typical panel of primary care patients. CONCLUSIONS: Controlling for patient and health system factors, physicians' therapeutic confidence and personal experience were important influences on mental health referral. Research is needed to determine if addressing these factors can facilitate more appropriate care.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Types of information physicians provide when prescribing antidepressants.

BACKGROUND: Providing antidepressant information to patients may foster greater adherence to therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess physician information-giving while prescribing antidepressants, and to identify factors that influence the provision of information. DESIGN: Randomized experiment using standardized patients (SPs). Standardized patients roles were generated by crossing 2 clinical conditions (major depression or adjustment disorder) with 3 medication request types (brand-specific, general, or none). PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and fifty-two general internists and family physicians recruited from solo and group practices and health maintenance organizations; cooperation rates ranged from 53% to 61%. MEASUREMENTS: We assessed physician information-giving by analyzing audio-recordings of interactions between physicians and SPs, and collected physician background information by survey. Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the influence of patient and physician factors on physicians' provision of information. RESULTS: One hundred and one physicians prescribed antidepressants, accounting for 131 interactions. The mean age of physicians was 46.3 years; 69% were males. Physicians mentioned an average of 5.7 specific topics of antidepressant-related information (of a possible maximum of 11). The most frequently mentioned topic was purpose (96.1%). Physicians infrequently provided information about the duration of therapy (34.9%) and costs (21.4%). Standardized patients who presented with major depression received less information than those with adjustment disorder, and older and solo/private practice physicians provided significantly less information to SPs. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians provide limited information to patients while prescribing antidepressants, often omitting critical information that may promote adherence. Mechanisms are needed to ensure that patients receive pertinent antidepressant information.

Adjustment Disorders↗
PubMed2005

Studying physician effects on patient outcomes: physician interactional style and performance on quality of care indicators.

Many prior studies which suggest a relationship between physician interactional style and patient outcomes may have been confounded by relying solely on patient reports, examining very few patients per physician, or not demonstrating evidence of a physician effect on the outcomes. We examined whether physician interactional style, measured both by patient report and objective encounter ratings, is related to performance on quality of care indicators. We also tested for the presence of physician effects on the performance indicators. Using data on 100 US primary care physician (PCP) claims data on 1,21,606 of their managed care patients, survey data on 4746 of their visiting patients, and audiotaped encounters of 2 standardized patients with each physician, we examined the relationships between claims-based quality of care indicators and both survey-derived patient perceptions of their physicians and objective ratings of interactional style in the audiotaped standardized patient encounters. Multi-level models examined whether physician effects (variance components) on care indicators were mediated by patient perceptions or objective ratings of interactional style. We found significant physician effects associated with glycohemoglobin and cholesterol testing. There was also a clinically significant association between better patient perceptions of their physicians and more glycohemoglobin testing. Multi-level analyses revealed, however, that the physician effect on glycohemoglobin testing was not mediated by patient perceived physician interaction style. In conclusion, similar to prior studies, we found evidence of an apparent relationship between patient perceptions of their physician and patient outcomes. However, the apparent relationships found in this study between patient perceptions of their physicians and patient care processes do not reflect physician style, but presumably reflect unmeasured patient confounding. Multi-level modeling may contribute to better understanding of the relationships between physician style and patient outcomes.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Influence of patients' requests for direct-to-consumer advertised antidepressants: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs in the United States is both ubiquitous and controversial. Critics charge that it leads to overprescribing, while proponents counter that it helps avert underuse of effective treatments, especially for conditions that are poorly recognized or stigmatized. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the effects of patients' DTC-related requests on physicians' initial treatment decisions in patients with depressive symptoms. DESIGN: Randomized trial using standardized patients (SPs). Six SP roles were created by crossing 2 conditions (major depression or adjustment disorder with depressed mood) with 3 request types (brand-specific, general, or none). SETTING: Offices of primary care physicians in Sacramento, Calif; San Francisco, Calif; and Rochester, NY, between May 2003 and May 2004. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty-two family physicians and general internists recruited from solo and group practices and health maintenance organizations; cooperation rates ranged from 53% to 61%. INTERVENTIONS: The SPs were randomly assigned to make 298 unannounced visits, with assignments constrained so physicians saw 1 SP with major depression and 1 with adjustment disorder. The SPs made a brand-specific drug request, a general drug request, or no request (control condition) in approximately one third of visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on prescribing, mental health referral, and primary care follow-up obtained from SP written reports, visit audiorecordings, chart review, and analysis of written prescriptions and drug samples. The effects of request type on prescribing were evaluated using contingency tables and confirmed in generalized linear mixed models that accounted for clustering and adjusted for site, physician, and visit characteristics. RESULTS: Standardized patient role fidelity was excellent, and the suspicion rate that physicians had seen an SP was 13%. In major depression, rates of antidepressant prescribing were 53%, 76%, and 31% for SPs making brand-specific, general, and no requests, respectively (P<.001). In adjustment disorder, antidepressant prescribing rates were 55%, 39%, and 10%, respectively (P<.001). The results were confirmed in multivariate models. Minimally acceptable initial care (any combination of an antidepressant, mental health referral, or follow-up within 2 weeks) was offered to 98% of SPs in the major depression role making a general request, 90% of those making a brand-specific request, and 56% of those making no request (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' requests have a profound effect on physician prescribing in major depression and adjustment disorder. Direct-to-consumer advertising may have competing effects on quality, potentially both averting underuse and promoting overuse.

Adjustment Disorders↗
PubMed2005

Measuring patient-centered communication in patient-physician consultations: theoretical and practical issues.

The goal of patient-centered communication (PCC) is to help practitioners provide care that is concordant with the patient's values, needs and preferences, and that allows patients to provide input and participate actively in decisions regarding their health and health care. PCC is widely endorsed as a central component of high-quality health care, but it is unclear what it is and how to measure it. PCC includes four communication domains: the patient's perspective, the psychosocial context, shared understanding, and sharing power and responsibility. Problems in measuring PCC include lack of theoretical and conceptual clarity, unexamined assumptions, lack of adequate control for patient characteristics and social contexts, modest correlations between survey and observational measures, and overlap of PCC with other constructs. We outline problems in operationalizing PCC, choosing tools for assessing PCC, choosing data sources, identifying mediators of PCC, and clarifying outcomes of PCC. We propose nine areas for improvement: (1) developing theory-based operational definitions of PCC; (2) clarifying what is being measured; (3) accounting for the communication behaviors of each individual in the encounter as well as interactions among them; (4) accounting for context; (5) validating of instruments; (6) interpreting patient ratings of their physicians; (7) doing longitudinal studies; (8) examining pathways and mediators of links between PCC and outcomes; and (9) dealing with the complexity of the construct of PCC. We discuss the use of observational and survey measures, multi-method and mixed-method research, and standardized patients. The increasing influence of the PCC literature to guide medical education, licensure of clinicians, and assessments of quality provides a strong rationale for further clarification of these measurement issues.

Communication↗
PubMed2005

Emotion language in primary care encounters: reliability and validity of an emotion word count coding system.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a reliable and valid computer coded measure to assess emotional expression from transcripts of physician-patient interactions. METHODS: Physician encounters with two standardized patients (SPs) were audiotaped. Fifty patients from each physician (n = 100 primary care physicians) completed surveys that assessed patients' perceptions of their relationships with physicians. Audio-recordings of 193 patient-physician encounters were transcribed and computer-coded to derive a percent emotion words, and research assistants completed the Measure of Patient-Centered Communication (MPCC). RESULTS: After adjustment for potential confounders, regression analyses revealed physicians' use of emotion words and the MPCC contribute independently to patients' and SPs' perceptions of their relationship with physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The computerized coding of emotion words shows promise as a reliable, valid, and simple method to code transcript data of physician-patient interactions. This method may be expanded to examine other aspects of physician language and does not require coder training.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2005

Peer assessment of professional competence.

BACKGROUND: Current assessment formats for medical students reliably test core knowledge and basic skills. Methods for assessing other important domains of competence, such as interpersonal skills, humanism and teamwork skills, are less well developed. This study describes the development, implementation and results of peer assessment as a measure of professional competence of medical students to be used for formative purposes. METHODS: Year 2 medical students assessed the professional competence of their peers using an online assessment instrument. Fifteen randomly selected classmates were assigned to assess each student. The responses were analysed to determine the reliability and validity of the scores and to explore relationships between peer assessments and other assessment measures. RESULTS: Factor analyses suggest a 2-dimensional conceptualisation of professional competence: 1 factor represents Work Habits, such as preparedness and initiative, and the other factor represents Interpersonal Habits, including respect and trustworthiness. The Work Habits factor had moderate, yet statistically significant correlations ranging from 0.21 to 0.53 with all other performance measures that were part of a comprehensive assessment of professional competence. Approximately 6 peer raters were needed to achieve a generalisability coefficient of 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that it is possible to introduce peer assessment for formative purposes in an undergraduate medical school programme that provides multiple opportunities to interact with and observe peers.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2005

Assessing communication competence: a review of current tools.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of communication competence has become a major priority of medical educational, policy, and licensing organizations in the United States and Canada. Multiple tools are available to assess communication competence, but there are few studies that compare the tools. METHODS: A consensus panel of six family medicine educators evaluated 15 instruments measuring the physician-patient interview. The primary evaluation criteria came from the Kalamazoo Consensus Statement (KCS), which derived from a multidisciplinary panel of experts that defined seven essential elements of physician-patient communication. We evaluated psychometric properties of the instruments and other assessment criteria felt to be important to family physicians (exploring family issues, interview efficiency, and usability/practicality). RESULTS: Instruments that received the highest ratings on KCS elements were designed for faculty raters and varied in their practicality/usability ratings and psychometric properties. Few instruments were rated high on psychometric properties or exploring family issues. CONCLUSIONS: The process successfully reviewed and provided a framework for assessing communication skills instruments. There is a need to expand the study, including use of a larger cohort of reviewers to provide more validity to the results and minimize potential biases.

Aptitude Tests↗
PubMed2004

Communicating evidence for participatory decision making.

CONTEXT: Informed patients are more likely to actively participate in their care, make wiser decisions, come to a common understanding with their physicians, and adhere more fully to treatment; however, currently there are no evidence-based guidelines for discussing clinical evidence with patients in the process of making medical decisions. OBJECTIVE: To identify ways to communicate evidence that improve patient understanding, involvement in decisions, and outcomes. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Systematic review of MEDLINE for the period 1966-2003 and review of reference lists of retrieved articles to identify original research dealing with communication between clinicians and patients and directly addressing methods of presenting clinical evidence to patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators and a research assistant screened 367 abstracts and 2 investigators reviewed 51 full-text articles, yielding 8 potentially relevant articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: Methods for communicating clinical evidence to patients include nonquantitative general terms, numerical translation of clinical evidence, graphical representations, and decision aids. Focus-group data suggest presenting options and/or equipoise before asking patients about preferred decision-making roles or formats for presenting details. Relative risk reductions may be misleading; absolute risk is preferred. Order of information presented and time-frame of outcomes can bias patient understanding. Limited evidence supports use of human stick figure graphics or faces for single probabilities and vertical bar graphs for comparative information. Less-educated and older patients preferred proportions to percentages and did not appreciate confidence intervals. Studies of decision aids rarely addressed patient-physician communication directly. No studies addressed clinical outcomes of discussions of clinical evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of evidence to guide how physicians can most effectively share clinical evidence with patients facing decisions; however, basing our recommendations largely on related studies and expert opinion, we describe means of accomplishing 5 communication tasks to address in framing and communicating clinical evidence: understanding the patient's (and family members') experience and expectations; building partnership; providing evidence, including a balanced discussion of uncertainties; presenting recommendations informed by clinical judgment and patient preferences; and checking for understanding and agreement.

Communication↗
PubMed2004

Patient trust: is it related to patient-centered behavior of primary care physicians?

BACKGROUND: Patients' trust in their health care providers may affect their satisfaction and health outcomes. Despite the potential importance of trust, there are few studies of its correlates using objective measures of physician behavior during encounters with patients. METHODS: We assessed physician behavior and length of visit using audio tapes of encounters of 2 unannounced standardized patients (SPs) with 100 community-based primary care physicians participating in a large managed care organization. Physician behavior was assessed via 3 components of the Measure of Patient-Centered Communication (MPCC) scale. The Primary Care Assessment Survey (PCAS) trust subscale was administered to 50 patients from each physician's practice and to SPs. We used multilevel modeling to examine the associations between physicians' Patient-Centered Communication during the SP visits and ratings of trust by both patients and SPs. RESULTS: Component 1 of the MPCC, which explored the patient's experience of the disease and illness, was independently associated with patient's rating of trust in their physician. A I SD increase in this score was associated with 0.08 SD increase in trust (95% confidence interval 0.02-0.14). Each additional minute spent in SP visits was also independently associated with 0.01 SD increase in patient trust. (95% confidence interval 0.0001-0.02). Component 1 and visit length were also positively associated with SP trust ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Physician verbal behavior during an SP encounter is associated with trust reported by SPs and patients. Research is needed to determine whether interventions designed to enhance physicians' exploration patients' experiences of disease and illness improves trust. Key Words: physician-patient relationship, patient-centered care, trust, physician behavior

Adult↗