OBJECTIVE: Effective communication is an essential aspect of high-quality patient care and a core competency for physicians. To date, assessment of communication skills in team-based settings has not been well established. We sought to tailor a psychometrically validated instrument, the Communication Assessment Tool, for use in Team settings (CAT-T), and test the feasibility of collecting patient perspectives of communication with medical teams in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional study in an academic, tertiary, urban, Level 1 trauma center using the CAT-T, a 15-item instrument. Items were answered via a 5-point scale, with 5 = excellent. All adult ED patients (> or = 18 y/o) were eligible if the following exclusion criteria did not apply: primary psychiatric issues, critically ill, physiologically unstable, non-English speaking, or under arrest. RESULTS: 81 patients were enrolled (mean age: 44, S.D. = 17; 44% male). Highest ratings were for treating the patient with respect (69% excellent), paying attention to the patient (69% excellent), and showing care and concern (69% excellent). Lowest ratings were for greeting the patient appropriately (54%), encouraging the patient to ask questions (54%), showing interest in the patient's ideas about his or her health (53% excellent), and involving the patient in decisions as much as he or she wanted (53% excellent). CONCLUSION: Although this pilot study has several methodological limitations, it demonstrates a signal that patient assessment of communication with the medical team is feasible and offers important feedback. Results indicate the need to improve communication in the ED. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: In the ED, focusing on the medical team rather then individual caregivers may more accurately reflect patients' experience.
OBJECTIVE: Effective communication is an essential aspect of high-quality patient care and a core competency for physicians. To date, assessment of communication skills in team-based settings has not been well established. We sought to tailor a psychometrically validated instrument, the Communication Assessment Tool, for use in Team settings (CAT-T), and test the feasibility of collecting patient perspectives of communication with medical teams in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional study in an academic, tertiary, urban, Level 1 trauma center using the CAT-T, a 15-item instrument. Items were answered via a 5-point scale, with 5 = excellent. All adult ED patients (> or = 18 y/o) were eligible if the following exclusion criteria did not apply: primary psychiatric issues, critically ill, physiologically unstable, non-English speaking, or under arrest. RESULTS: 81 patients were enrolled (mean age: 44, S.D. = 17; 44% male). Highest ratings were for treating the patient with respect (69% excellent), paying attention to the patient (69% excellent), and showing care and concern (69% excellent). Lowest ratings were for greeting the patient appropriately (54%), encouraging the patient to ask questions (54%), showing interest in the patient's ideas about his or her health (53% excellent), and involving the patient in decisions as much as he or she wanted (53% excellent). CONCLUSION: Although this pilot study has several methodological limitations, it demonstrates a signal that patient assessment of communication with the medical team is feasible and offers important feedback. Results indicate the need to improve communication in the ED. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: In the ED, focusing on the medical team rather then individual caregivers may more accurately reflect patients' experience.
Authors: Gillian King; Joanne Maxwell; Amir Karmali; Simon Hagens; Madhu Pinto; Laura Williams; Keith Adamson Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-04-06 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Jenna M Evans; Alysha Glazer; Rebecca Lum; Esti Heale; Marnie MacKinnon; Peter G Blake; Michael Walsh Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-08-25 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Robert Gramling; Elizabeth Gajary-Coots; Susan Stanek; Nathalie Dougoud; Heather Pyke; Marie Thomas; Jenica Cimino; Mechelle Sanders; Stewart C Alexander; Ronald Epstein; Kevin Fiscella; David Gramling; Susan Ladwig; Wendy Anderson; Stephen Pantilat; Sally A Norton Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Joseph S Turner; Katie E Pettit; Bryce B Buente; Aloysius J Humbert; Anthony J Perkins; Jeffrey A Kline Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2016-05-21 Impact factor: 2.463