How do patients define "good" and "bad" doctors?

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY

Knowledge of hospital patients' perceptions of doctors' qualities is limited. The purpose of this study was to explore hospital patients' definitions of "good" and "bad" doctors.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews conducted with 68 consecutive hospital patients. The questions explored the characteristics of good/bad doctors. Responses were subjected to content analysis.

RESULTS

The patients' mean age was 72.7 (+/- 15) years; 61% were female. Content analysis produced 9 categories connoted positively/negatively; the mean number of categories/patient response was 2.4 (+/- 1.3), ranging from 1-6. Sensitivity/insensitivity to feelings were in the forefront, together with the importance of the relational dimension and the need to provide treatment tailored to the patient's needs. Patients' responses emphasised "bad" doctors' use of medicine as self-serving and not serving the patient.

CONCLUSION

This qualitative enquiry made it possible to gather information on the patients' expectations or beliefs outside physicians' or health researchers' pre-established categories. It emphasised that acknowledging possible areas of uncertainty may be less threatening for the doctor's image than exhibiting scientific proficiency unadapted to the patient's expectations and needs.