OBJECTIVE: To identify patient's preferences for patient centred consultation in general practice. DESIGN: Questionnaire study. SETTING: Consecutive patients in the waiting room of three doctors' surgeries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Key domains of patient centredness from the patient perspective. Predictors of preferences for patient centredness, a prescription, and examination. RESULTS: 865 patients participated: 824 (95%) returned the pre-consultation questionnaire and were similar in demographic characteristic to national samples. Factor analysis identified three domains of patient preferences: communication (agreed with by 88-99%), partnership (77-87%), and health promotion (85-89%). Fewer wanted an examination (63%), and only a quarter wanted a prescription. As desire for a prescription was modestly associated with desire for good communication (odds ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.69), partnership (1.46; 1.01 to 2.09), and health promotion (1.61; 1.12 to 2.31) this study may have underestimated preferences for patient centredness compared with populations with stronger preferences for a prescription. Patients who strongly wanted good communication were more likely to feel unwell (very, moderately, and slightly unwell; odds ratios 1, 0.56, 0.39 respectively, z trend P<0.001), be high attenders (1.70; 1.18 to 2.44), and have no paid work (1.84; 1.21 to 2.79). Strongly wanting partnership was also related to feeling unwell, worrying about the problem, high attendance, and no paid work; and health promotion to high attendance and worry. CONCLUSION: Patients in primary care strongly want a patient centred approach, with communication, partnership, and health promotion. Doctors should be sensitive to patients who have a strong preference for patient centredness-those vulnerable either psychosocially or because they are feeling unwell.
OBJECTIVE: To identify patient's preferences for patient centred consultation in general practice. DESIGN: Questionnaire study. SETTING: Consecutive patients in the waiting room of three doctors' surgeries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Key domains of patient centredness from the patient perspective. Predictors of preferences for patient centredness, a prescription, and examination. RESULTS: 865 patients participated: 824 (95%) returned the pre-consultation questionnaire and were similar in demographic characteristic to national samples. Factor analysis identified three domains of patient preferences: communication (agreed with by 88-99%), partnership (77-87%), and health promotion (85-89%). Fewer wanted an examination (63%), and only a quarter wanted a prescription. As desire for a prescription was modestly associated with desire for good communication (odds ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.69), partnership (1.46; 1.01 to 2.09), and health promotion (1.61; 1.12 to 2.31) this study may have underestimated preferences for patient centredness compared with populations with stronger preferences for a prescription. Patients who strongly wanted good communication were more likely to feel unwell (very, moderately, and slightly unwell; odds ratios 1, 0.56, 0.39 respectively, z trend P<0.001), be high attenders (1.70; 1.18 to 2.44), and have no paid work (1.84; 1.21 to 2.79). Strongly wanting partnership was also related to feeling unwell, worrying about the problem, high attendance, and no paid work; and health promotion to high attendance and worry. CONCLUSION:Patients in primary care strongly want a patient centred approach, with communication, partnership, and health promotion. Doctors should be sensitive to patients who have a strong preference for patient centredness-those vulnerable either psychosocially or because they are feeling unwell.
Entities:
Keywords:
Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship
Authors: Tim C olde Hartman; Hiske van Ravesteijn; Peter Lucassen; Kees van Boven; Evelyn van Weel-Baumgarten; Chris van Weel Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Matthew B Stanbrook; Diane Kelsall; Noni E MacDonald; Daniel Rosenfield; Ken Flegel; Paul C Hébert Journal: CMAJ Date: 2011-10-31 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Heather Campbell; Ann Russell; Jennifer Henderson; Anne Matheson; Blake Melnick Journal: Patient Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 3.883