Fiscella Kevin, Franks Peter, Srinivasan Malathi, Kravitz Richard L, Epstein Ronald
University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY, USA.
Ann Fam Med. 2007 Mar-Apr;5(2):151-8. doi: 10.1370/afm.643.
Patient ratings of physician's patient-centered communication are used by various specialty credentialing organizations and managed care organizations as a measure of physician communication skills. We wanted to compare ratings by real patients with ratings by standardized patients of physician communication.
We assessed physician communication using a modified version of the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ) among a sample of 100 community physicians. The HCCQ measures physician autonomy support, a key dimension in patient-centered communication. For each physician, the questionnaire was completed by roughly 49 real patients and 2 unannounced standardized patients. Standardized patients portrayed 2 roles: gastroesophageal disorder reflux symptoms and poorly characterized chest pain with multiple unexplained symptoms. We compared the distribution, reliability, and physician rank derived from using real and standardized patients after adjusting for patient, physician, and standardized patient effects.
There were real and standardized patient ratings for 96 of the 100 physicians. Compared with standardized patient scores, real-patient-derived HCCQ scores were higher (mean 22.0 vs 17.2), standard deviations were lower (3.1 vs 4.9), and ranges were similar (both 5-25). Calculated real patient reliability, given 49 ratings per physician, was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.84) compared with the standardized patient reliability of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.39-0.73), given 2 ratings per physician. Spearman rank correlation between mean real patient and standardized patient scores was positive but small to moderate in magnitude, 0.28.
Real patient and standardized patient ratings of physician communication style differ substantially and appear to provide different information about physicians' communication style.
各种专业认证组织和管理式医疗组织将患者对医生以患者为中心的沟通的评分作为衡量医生沟通技巧的一种方式。我们希望比较真实患者的评分与标准化患者对医生沟通的评分。
我们使用经过修改的医疗保健氛围问卷(HCCQ)对100名社区医生进行了医生沟通评估。HCCQ衡量医生的自主性支持,这是以患者为中心的沟通中的一个关键维度。对于每位医生,问卷由大约49名真实患者和2名未事先通知的标准化患者完成。标准化患者扮演两种角色:胃食管反流症状和具有多种无法解释症状的特征不明确的胸痛。在调整了患者、医生和标准化患者的影响后,我们比较了使用真实患者和标准化患者得出的分布、可靠性和医生排名。
100名医生中有96名有真实患者和标准化患者的评分。与标准化患者的分数相比,真实患者得出的HCCQ分数更高(平均22.0对17.2),标准差更低(3.1对4.9),范围相似(均为5 - 25)。考虑到每位医生有49个评分,计算得出的真实患者可靠性为0.78(95%置信区间[CI],0.71 - 0.84),而考虑到每位医生有2个评分,标准化患者的可靠性为0.57(95% CI,0.39 - 0.73)。真实患者平均分与标准化患者分数之间的Spearman等级相关性为正,但幅度较小至中等,为0.28。
真实患者和标准化患者对医生沟通风格的评分存在显著差异,并且似乎提供了关于医生沟通风格的不同信息。