Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30782753›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Difficult patient-doctor encounters in a Swiss university outpatient clinic: cross-sectional study.

Pau Mota, Kevin Selby, Alexandre Gouveia, Konstantinos Tzartzas, Philippe Staeger, Regis Marion-Veyron, Patrick Bodenmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Pau MotaDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for Vulnerable Populations, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Kevin SelbyDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for General Medicine, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9096-0720
Alexandre GouveiaDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for General Medicine, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Konstantinos TzartzasDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for General Medicine, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Philippe StaegerDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for General Medicine, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Regis Marion-VeyronDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for General Medicine, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland.
Patrick BodenmannDepartment of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine, Center for Vulnerable Populations, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrevious research has shown that multiple factors contribute to healthcare providers perceiving encounters as difficult, and are related to both medical and non-medical demands.

aimTo measure the prevalence and to identify predictors of encounters perceived as difficult by medical residents. DESIGN AND

settingCross-sectional study at the Department of Ambulatory Care and Community Medicine (DACCM), a university outpatient clinic with a long tradition of caring for vulnerable patients.

methodWe identified difficult doctor-patient encounters using the validated Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire (DDPRQ-10), and characterised patients using the patient's vulnerability grid, a validated questionnaire measuring five domains of vulnerability, both completed by medical residents after each encounter. We used a multiple linear regression model with the outcome variable as the DDPRQ-10 score, controlling for resident characteristics.

participantsWe analysed 527 patient encounters performed by all 27 DACCM residents (17 women and 10 men). We asked each medical resident to evaluate 20 consecutive consultations starting on the same date. OUTCOME: One hundred and fifty-seven encounters (29.8%) were perceived as difficult.

resultsAfter adjusting for differences among residents, all five domains of the patient vulnerability grid were independently associated with a difficult encounter: frequent healthcare user; psychological comorbidity; health comorbidity; risky behaviours and a precarious social situation.

conclusionNearly a third of encounters were perceived as difficult by medical residents in our university outpatient clinic that cares for a high proportion of vulnerable patients. This represents twice the average ratio of difficult encounters in general practice. All five domains of patient vulnerability appear to have partial explanatory power on medical residents' perception of difficult patient encounters.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelInternship and ResidencyPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesClinical CompetenceCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandUniversitiesdifficult doctor-patient encountergeneral practice medicinevulnerable patients

Identifiers

PMID30782753
PMCPMC6347890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.