Staeck Robert, Sauer Carsten, Asch Steven M, Zambrano Sofia C
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Graduate School for Health Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
BMC Med. 2025 Apr 14;23(1):218. doi: 10.1186/s12916-025-04046-6.
Serious illness conversations can cause discomfort in patients, potentially impeding their understanding and decision-making. Identifying ways in which physicians can reduce this discomfort may improve care. This study investigates which physician communication styles and characteristics individuals perceive as comforting in physician-patient serious illness conversations.
We conducted a nationwide online factorial survey in German, French, and Italian with 1572 Swiss participants from the public (51.4% women) aged 16 to 94. Each participant assessed 5 out of 1000 different vignettes describing a physician informing a cancer patient about their terminal prognosis. We systematically manipulated 11 attributes: physician's years of experience, physician sex, patient sex, patient age, prior relationship to physician, clarity of information, self-disclosure, physician taking time, recommendation, expression of sadness, and continuity of care. Participants evaluated their comfort level with the physician described in the vignettes. Multilevel models with random effects were used to analyze the impact of the dimensions on comfort.
Clarity of information (β = 2.13, p < 0.01), taking enough time (β = 2.00, p < 0.01), and continuity of care (β = 1.27, p < 0.01) were the strongest predictors of comfort. A prior physician-patient relationship significantly increased comfort, with a longer relationship being more comforting (p < 0.01). Physician self-disclosure (β = 0.40, p < 0.01) and expression of sadness (β = 0.46, p < 0.01; β = 0.58, p < 0.01) also increased comfort. Recommendations based on experience did not influence comfort but failing to provide reasons for recommendations decreased comfort (β = - 0.24, p < 0.01). Recommendations based on patient preference increased comfort (β = 0.30, p < 0.01). A limitation of this study is that the vignettes describe only fictitious situations and can thus be seen as oversimplifications.
Taking time, providing clear information, and ensuring continuity of care are pivotal in enhancing comfort. Also relevant are the expression of sadness, physician self-disclosure, and a prior relationship with the patient.
重病告知谈话可能会让患者感到不适,这可能会妨碍他们的理解和决策。确定医生可以减少这种不适的方法可能会改善医疗护理。本研究调查了在医患重病告知谈话中,个体认为哪些医生的沟通方式和特征能带来安慰。
我们在德国、法国和意大利进行了一项全国性的在线析因调查,共有1572名来自瑞士公众的参与者(51.4%为女性),年龄在16至94岁之间。每位参与者评估了1000个不同场景描述中的5个,这些场景描述了一名医生向癌症患者告知其晚期预后情况。我们系统地操控了11个属性:医生的工作年限、医生性别、患者性别、患者年龄、与医生之前的关系、信息的清晰度、自我表露、医生花费的时间、建议、悲伤的表达以及护理的连续性。参与者对场景中描述的医生给自己带来的安慰程度进行了评估。使用具有随机效应的多层次模型来分析这些维度对安慰程度的影响。
信息清晰度(β = 2.13,p < 0.01)、花费足够的时间(β = 2.00,p < 0.01)以及护理的连续性(β = 1.27,p < 0.01)是安慰程度最强的预测因素。之前的医患关系显著提高了安慰程度,关系持续时间越长,安慰程度越高(p < 0.01)。医生的自我表露(β = 0.40,p < 0.01)和悲伤的表达(β = 0.46,p < 0.01;β = 0.58,p < 0.01)也提高了安慰程度。基于经验给出的建议并未影响安慰程度,但不给出建议的理由会降低安慰程度(β = -0.24,p < 0.01)。基于患者偏好给出的建议提高了安慰程度(β = 0.30,p < 0.01)。本研究的一个局限性在于这些场景仅描述了虚构的情况,因此可被视为过于简化。
花费时间、提供清晰的信息以及确保护理的连续性对于提高安慰程度至关重要。悲伤的表达、医生的自我表露以及与患者之前的关系也很重要。