Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35379688›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2022

Clinician views on optimism and empathy in primary care consultations: a qualitative interview study.

Stephanie Hughes, Jane Louise Vennik, Kirsten A Smith, Jennifer Bostock, Jeremy Howick, Christian Mallen, Paul Little, Mohana Ratnapalan, Emily Lyness, Geraldine M Leydon and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Unpacking complexity in addressing the contribution of trauma to women's ill health: a qualitative study of perspectives from general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  3. 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

14 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephanie HughesUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK sh3r11@southampton.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4801-8245
Jane Louise VennikUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Kirsten A SmithUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Jennifer BostockPolicy Innovation & Evaluation Research Unit (PIRU): London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jeremy HowickUniversity of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK.
Christian MallenKeele University, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Staffordshire, UK.
Paul LittleUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Mohana RatnapalanUniversity of Nottingham, Centre for Academic Primary Care, Nottingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6505-6107
Emily LynessUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Geraldine M LeydonUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Hajira Dambha-MillerUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Leanne MorrisonUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Hazel A EverittUniversity of Southampton, Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, Southampton, UK.
Felicity L BishopPsychology Department, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Southampton City Council · GBArthritis UK · GBInstitute of Psychology · RUUniversity of London · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPractitioner expressions of optimism and empathy may improve treatment engagement, adherence, and patient satisfaction but are not delivered consistently amid the challenges of everyday clinical practice.

aimTo explore primary care practitioner (PCP) views about optimistic and empathic communication in consultations; and to identify behavioural, attitudinal, and/or contextual issues likely to encourage or deter PCPs from practising such communication. DESIGN &

settingQualitative interview study with 20 PCPs (GPs, practice nurses, and primary care physiotherapists).

methodSemi-structured telephone interviews with 20 PCPs. Data were analysed thematically.

resultsA conceptual mismatch between optimism and patient expectations became apparent; when asked how PCPs communicate about the likely effects of a treatment, answers were focussed around managing patient expectations. When prompted, it became clear PCPs were open to communicating optimistically with patients, but emphasised the need for realism. Concerns arose that patients may not be receptive to optimistic messages, especially when holding negative expectations. PCPs felt that expressing empathy is fundamental to all clinical consultations, noting that it can be challenging. Some PCPs worried that increasing expressions of empathy might increase their risk of clinician burnout and felt guilty about (appropriately) communicating empathy while maintaining some emotional distance.

conclusionPCPs agreed expressing realistic optimism during consultations could aid communication and would constitute a novel change to practice. PCPs strive for clinical empathy but can struggle to manage emotional self-protection. Specific training to help PCPs express realistic optimism and empathy, and better utilise efficient non-verbal skills could help these issues.

Indexed as

Empathygeneral practitionersoptimismphysician–patient relationsPrimary Health Carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID35379688
PMCPMC9680746
OpenAlexW4225242797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.