THE PATIENT-PHYSICIAN RELATIONSHIP AND ROLE OF EMPATHIC COMMUNICATION IN CONTACT LENS PRACTICE MEASUREMENT OF PATIENT SATISFACTION

Main Article Content

Daddi Fadel
Rute J Macedo-de-Araújo
Melissa Barnett

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the relationship between eye care practitioners and contact lens patients and to
determine how empathy is associated with patients’ overall satisfaction.


Methods: Multilingual electronic surveys shared by email and on social media in patients’ and practitioners’ groups. Ratings were converted to a numerical scale. The scores were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum tests.


Results: The survey had 804 responses: 68.4% were over 46 years old, and 58.1% were female. Only 770 reported the type of contact lens worn. Of all patients, 10.6% would not recommend their physician due to feeling excluded from decisions (55.3%), lack of personal interest (63.5%), no written recommendations (84%), and unmet expectations (77%). Scleral lens wearers were highly satisfied. Optometrists excelled in care, ratings, relationships, communication, symptom relief, and prevention.


Discussion: The findings highlight the importance of empathy in eye care and its impact on patient experiences. Factors such as contact lens type, physician recommendation, and physician type can influence the level of empathy perceived by patients. Satisfaction varied based on contact lens type, with soft and scleral lens wearers reporting better experiences. Patients valued physicians who listened, explained treatments, showed empathy, and had patient-centered communication and open-ended questions. Optometrists were scored higher than ophthalmologists in several aspects.


Conclusion: Patients, especially scleral lens patients, were generally satisfied with the services and care. Optometrists scored higher than ophthalmologists. Patients would not recommend their physicians mainly because of a lack of empathy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Fadel D, Macedo-de-Araújo RJ, Barnett M. THE PATIENT-PHYSICIAN RELATIONSHIP AND ROLE OF EMPATHIC COMMUNICATION IN CONTACT LENS PRACTICE : MEASUREMENT OF PATIENT SATISFACTION . JCLRS [Internet]. 2024Mar.22 [cited 2024May19];8(1):20-6. Available from: https://www.jclrs.org/index.php/JCLRS/article/view/58
Section
Original Article

References

1. Butalid L, Bensing JM, Verhaak PFM. Talking about psychosocial problems: An observational study on changes in doctor-patient communication in general practice between 1977 and 2008. Patient Educ Couns. Mar 2014;94(3):314-321. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.11.004
2. Mercer SW, Cawston PG, Bikker AP. Quality in general practice consultations; a qualitative study of the views of patients living in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland. Bmc Fam Pract. Apr 19 2007;8doi:Artn 2210.1186/1471-2296-8-22
3. Butalid L, Verhaak PFM, Tromp F, Bensing JM. Changes in the quality of doctor-patient communication between 1982 and 2001: an observational study on hypertension care as perceived by patients and general practitioners. BMJ Open. 2011;1(1)doi:ARTN e00020310.1136/bmjopen-2011-000203
4. Barratt A. Evidence Based Medicine and Shared Decision Making: The challenge of getting both evidence and preferences into health care. Patient Educ Couns. Dec 2008;73(3):407-412. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.054
5. Coulter A, Entwistle VA, Eccles A, Ryan S, Shepperd S, Perera R. Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Mar 3 2015;2015(3):CD010523. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010523.pub2
6. Bensing J. Bridging the gap. The separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine. Patient Educ Couns. Jan 2000;39(1):17-25. doi:Doi 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00087-7
7. Rider EA, Kurtz S, Slade D, et al. The International Charter for Human Values in Healthcare: An interprofessional global collaboration to enhance values and communication in healthcare. Patient Educ Couns. Sep 2014;96(3):273-280. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.06.017
8. de Haes H. Dilemmas in patient centeredness and shared decision making: A case for vulnerability. Patient Educ Couns. Sep 2006;62(3):291-298. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2006.06.012
9. Bayne H, Neukrug E, Hays D, Britton B. A comprehensive model for optimizing empathy in person-centered care. Patient Educ Couns. Nov 2013;93(2):209-215. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.05.016
10. Stange KC, Ferrer RL. The paradox of primary care. Ann Fam Med. Jul-Aug 2009;7(4):293-9. doi:10.1370/afm.1023
11. Perrin JM, Gnanasekaran S, Delahaye J. Psychological aspects of chronic health conditions. Pediatr Rev. Mar 2012;33(3):99-109. doi:10.1542/pir.33-3-99
12. Midence K. The Effects of Chronic Illness on Children and Their Families - an Overview. Genet Soc Gen Psych. Aug 1994;120(3):311-326.
13. Roncevic N, Stojadinovic A, Odri I. [Chronic diseases in adolescence]. Med Pregl. Jan-Feb 2006;59(1-2):33-7. doi:10.2298/mpns0602033r
14. Milin M, Cornec D, Chastaing M, et al. Le syndrome sec est associé à la fatigue, l’anxiété, la dépression et l’altération de la qualité de vie, de façon identique chez les patients atteints ou non de syndrome de Gougerot-Sjögren primitif. Revue du Rhumatisme. 2017/07/01/ 2017;84(4):331-335. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhum.2017.04.005
15. Mercer SW, Reynolds WJ. Empathy and quality of care. Brit J Gen Pract. Oct 2002;52:S9-S12.
16. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ, Mangione S, Vergare M, Magee M. Physician empathy: Definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiat. Sep 2002;159(9):1563-1569. doi:DOI 10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1563
17. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2022; Vienna. Available at: https://www.R-project.org
18. Thompson TD, Weiss M. Homeopathy--what are the active ingredients? An exploratory study using the UK Medical Research Council’s framework for the evaluation of complex interventions. BMC Complement Altern Med. Nov 13 2006;6:37. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-6-37
19. Hannöver W, Dogs CP, Kordy H. Patientenzufriedenheit – ein Maß für Behandlungserfolg? Psychotherapeut. 2000/09/01 2000;45(5):292-300. doi:10.1007/s002780000094
20. Michlig M, Ausfeld-Hafter B, Busato A. Patient satisfaction with primary care: a comparison between conventional care and traditional Chinese medicine. Complement Ther Med. Dec 2008;16(6):350-8. doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2007.12.001
21. Attkisson CC, Zwick R. The client satisfaction questionnaire. Psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Eval Program Plann. 1982;5(3):233-7. doi:10.1016/0149-7189(82)90074-x
22. Goldstein MS, Glik D. Use of and satisfaction with homeopathy in a patient population. Altern Ther Health Med. Mar 1998;4(2):60-5.
23. Maurette P, Sfa CAMR. To err is human: building a safer health system. Ann Fr Anesth. Jun 2002;21(6):453-454. Doi 10.1016/S0750-7658(02)00670-6
24. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. 2001.
25. Foundation A, Foundation A-A, European Federation of Internal M. Medical professionalism in the new millenium: a physician charter. J Am Coll Surg. Jan 2003;196(1):115-8. doi:10.1016/s1072-7515(02)01617-4
26. Genteis M, Edgman-Levitan S, Dalay J, Delbanco T. Through the patient’s eyes: Understanding and promoting patient-centered care. J Healthcare Qual. 05/01 2003;25:47. doi:10.1097/01445442-200305000-00015
27. Laine C, Davidoff F. Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA. Jan 10 1996;275(2):152-6.
28. Wise TN. The medical interview: Clinical care, education, and research - Lipkin,M. Psychosomatics. Jul-Aug 1997;38(4):392-393. doi:Doi 10.1016/S0033-3182(97)71448-8
29. Roter DL, Hall JA. Physician gender and patient-centered communication: a critical review of empirical research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2004;25:497-519. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.25.101802.123134
30. Friedman DS, Hahn SR, Gelb L, et al. Doctor-patient communication, health-related beliefs, and adherence in glaucoma results from the Glaucoma Adherence and Persistency Study. Ophthalmology. Aug 2008;115(8):1320-7, 1327 e1-3. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.11.023
31. Hahn SR, Lipton RB, Sheftell FD, et al. Healthcare provider-patient communication and migraine assessment: results of the American Migraine Communication Study, phase II. Curr Med Res Opin. Jun 2008;24(6):1711-8. doi:10.1185/03007990802122388
32. Tilia D, Lazon de la Jara P, Zhu H, Naduvilath TJ, Holden BA. The effect of compliance on contact lens case contamination. Optom Vis Sci. Mar 2014;91(3):262-71. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000000163
33. De Beni R, Moe A. Imagery and rehearsal as study strategies for written or orally presented passages. Psychon B Rev. Dec 2003;10(4):975-980. doi:10.3758/Bf03196561
34. Mayeaux EJ, Jr., Murphy PW, Arnold C, Davis TC, Jackson RH, Sentell T. Improving patient education for patients with low literacy skills. Am Fam Physician. Jan 1996;53(1):205-11.
35. Arshad M, Carnt N, Tan J, Stapleton F. Compliance behaviour change in contact lens wearers: a randomised controlled trial. Eye (Lond). Mar 2021;35(3):988-995. doi:10.1038/s41433-020-1015-9