Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2014

01-03-2014 | Original Research

Specialties Differ in Which Aspects of Doctor Communication Predict Overall Physician Ratings

Authors: Denise D. Quigley, PhD, Marc N. Elliott, PhD, Donna O. Farley, PhD, Q Burkhart, MS, Samuel A. Skootsky, MD, Ron D. Hays, PhD

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 3/2014

Login to get access

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Effective doctor communication is critical to positive doctor–patient relationships and predicts better health outcomes. Doctor communication is the strongest predictor of patient ratings of doctors, but the most important aspects of communication may vary by specialty.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the importance of five aspects of doctor communication to overall physician ratings by specialty.

DESIGN

For each of 28 specialties, we calculated partial correlations of five communication items with a 0–10 overall physician rating, controlling for patient demographics.

PATIENTS

Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician and Group (CG-CAHPS®) 12-month Survey data collected 2005–2009 from 58,251 adults at a 534-physician medical group.

MAIN MEAsURES

CG-CAHPS includes a 0 (“Worst physician possible”) to 10 (“Best physician possible”) overall physician rating. Five doctor communication items assess how often the physician: explains things; listens carefully; gives easy-to-understand instructions; shows respect; and spends enough time.

KEY RESULTS

Physician showing respect was the most important aspect of communication for 23/28 specialties, with a mean partial correlation (0.27, ranging from 0.07 to 0.44 across specialties) that accounted for more than four times as much variance in the overall physician rating as any other communication item. Three of five communication items varied significantly across specialties in their associations with the overall rating (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

All patients valued respectful treatment; the importance of other aspects of communication varied significantly by specialty. Quality improvement efforts by all specialties should emphasize physicians showing respect to patients, and each specialty should also target other aspects of communication that matter most to their patients. The results have implications for improving provider quality improvement and incentive programs and the reporting of CAHPS data to patients. Specialists make important contributions to coordinated patient care, and thus customized approaches to measurement, reporting, and quality improvement efforts are important.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hulsman RL, Ros WJ, Winnubst JA, Bensing JM. Teaching clinically experienced physicians communication skills. A review of evaluation studies. Med Educ. 1999;33(9):655–668.PubMedCrossRef Hulsman RL, Ros WJ, Winnubst JA, Bensing JM. Teaching clinically experienced physicians communication skills. A review of evaluation studies. Med Educ. 1999;33(9):655–668.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Beck R, Daughtridge R, Sloane P. Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Med. 2002;15(1):25–38. Beck R, Daughtridge R, Sloane P. Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Med. 2002;15(1):25–38.
5.
go back to reference Roter DL. Patient participation in the patient-provider interaction: the effects of patient question asking on the quality of interaction. Satisfaction and compliance. Health Educ Monogr. 1977;5(4):281–315.PubMedCrossRef Roter DL. Patient participation in the patient-provider interaction: the effects of patient question asking on the quality of interaction. Satisfaction and compliance. Health Educ Monogr. 1977;5(4):281–315.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bartlett E, Grayson M, Barker R, Levine D, Golden A, Libber S. The effects of physician communications skills on patient satisfaction; recall, and adherence. J Chronic Dis. 1984;37(9–10):755–764.PubMedCrossRef Bartlett E, Grayson M, Barker R, Levine D, Golden A, Libber S. The effects of physician communications skills on patient satisfaction; recall, and adherence. J Chronic Dis. 1984;37(9–10):755–764.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hargraves JL, Hays RD, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) 2.0 adult core survey. Health Serv Res. 2003;38(6 Pt 1):1509–1527.PubMedCrossRef Hargraves JL, Hays RD, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) 2.0 adult core survey. Health Serv Res. 2003;38(6 Pt 1):1509–1527.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Tallman K, Janisse T, Frankel RM, Sung SH, Krupat E, Hsu JT. Communication practices of physicians with high patient-satisfaction ratings. Perm J. 2007;11(1):19–29.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Tallman K, Janisse T, Frankel RM, Sung SH, Krupat E, Hsu JT. Communication practices of physicians with high patient-satisfaction ratings. Perm J. 2007;11(1):19–29.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ruiz-Moral R, Perez Rodriguez E, Perula de Torres LA, de la Torre J. Physician-patient communication: a study on the observed behaviours of specialty physicians and the ways their patients perceive them. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;64(1–3):242–248. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2006.02.010.PubMedCrossRef Ruiz-Moral R, Perez Rodriguez E, Perula de Torres LA, de la Torre J. Physician-patient communication: a study on the observed behaviours of specialty physicians and the ways their patients perceive them. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;64(1–3):242–248. doi:10.​1016/​j.​pec.​2006.​02.​010.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Ware JE Jr, Yano EM, Frank HJ. Patients’ participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3(5):448–457.PubMedCrossRef Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Ware JE Jr, Yano EM, Frank HJ. Patients’ participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3(5):448–457.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Roter D, Hall JA. Doctors talking with patients/patients talking with doctors : improving communication in medical visits. Westport, Conn: Auburn House; 1992. Roter D, Hall JA. Doctors talking with patients/patients talking with doctors : improving communication in medical visits. Westport, Conn: Auburn House; 1992.
15.
go back to reference Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. Can Med Assoc J. 1995;152(9):1423–1433. Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. Can Med Assoc J. 1995;152(9):1423–1433.
16.
go back to reference Stewart M, Brown JB, Boon H, Galajda J, Meredith L, Sangster M. Evidence on patient-doctor communication. Cancer Prev Control. 1999;3(1):25–30.PubMed Stewart M, Brown JB, Boon H, Galajda J, Meredith L, Sangster M. Evidence on patient-doctor communication. Cancer Prev Control. 1999;3(1):25–30.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, Georgiou A, Kleijnen J. Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet. 2001;357(9258):757–762.PubMedCrossRef Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, Georgiou A, Kleijnen J. Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet. 2001;357(9258):757–762.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Nagy V. Clinician–patient communication: its big impact on health. Perm J. 2001;5(4):45–47. Nagy V. Clinician–patient communication: its big impact on health. Perm J. 2001;5(4):45–47.
21.
go back to reference Collier DA, Collier CE, Kelly TM. Benchmarking physician performance, part 1. J Med Pract Manage. 2006;21(4):185–189.PubMed Collier DA, Collier CE, Kelly TM. Benchmarking physician performance, part 1. J Med Pract Manage. 2006;21(4):185–189.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Hays RD, Shaul JA, Williams VS, Lubalin JS, Harris-Kojetin LD, Sweeny SF, et al. Psychometric properties of the CAHPS 1.0 survey measures. Consumer assessment of health plans study. Med Care. 1999;37(3 Suppl):MS22–MS31.PubMed Hays RD, Shaul JA, Williams VS, Lubalin JS, Harris-Kojetin LD, Sweeny SF, et al. Psychometric properties of the CAHPS 1.0 survey measures. Consumer assessment of health plans study. Med Care. 1999;37(3 Suppl):MS22–MS31.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Hays RD, Chong K, Brown J, Spritzer KL, Horne K. Patient reports and ratings of individual physicians: an evaluation of the doctor guide and consumer assessment of health plans study provider-level surveys. Am J Med Qual. 2003;18(5):190–196.PubMedCrossRef Hays RD, Chong K, Brown J, Spritzer KL, Horne K. Patient reports and ratings of individual physicians: an evaluation of the doctor guide and consumer assessment of health plans study provider-level surveys. Am J Med Qual. 2003;18(5):190–196.PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Solomon LS, Hays RD, Zaslavsky AM, Ding L, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of a group-level Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) instrument. Med Care. 2005;43(1):53–60.PubMed Solomon LS, Hays RD, Zaslavsky AM, Ding L, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of a group-level Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) instrument. Med Care. 2005;43(1):53–60.PubMed
28.
30.
go back to reference Kahn JM, Scales DC, Au DH, Carson SS, Curtis JR, Dudley RA, et al. An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: pay-for-performance in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;181(7):752–761. doi:10.1164/rccm.200903-0450ST.PubMedCrossRef Kahn JM, Scales DC, Au DH, Carson SS, Curtis JR, Dudley RA, et al. An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: pay-for-performance in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;181(7):752–761. doi:10.​1164/​rccm.​200903-0450ST.PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Sledge WH, Feinstein AR. A clinimetric approach to the components of the patient-physician relationship. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc. 1997;278(23):2043–2048.CrossRef Sledge WH, Feinstein AR. A clinimetric approach to the components of the patient-physician relationship. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc. 1997;278(23):2043–2048.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Martino SC, Elliott MN, Cleary PD, Kanouse DE, Brown JA, Spritzer KL, et al. Psychometric properties of an instrument to assess medicare beneficiaries’ prescription drug plan experiences. Health Care Financ Rev. 2009;30(3):41–53.PubMed Martino SC, Elliott MN, Cleary PD, Kanouse DE, Brown JA, Spritzer KL, et al. Psychometric properties of an instrument to assess medicare beneficiaries’ prescription drug plan experiences. Health Care Financ Rev. 2009;30(3):41–53.PubMed
38.
go back to reference White H. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica. 1980;48(4):817–838.CrossRef White H. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica. 1980;48(4):817–838.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Williams RL. A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics. 2000;56(2):645–646.PubMedCrossRef Williams RL. A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics. 2000;56(2):645–646.PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Chen L. Testing the mean of skewed distributions. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90(430):567–576.CrossRef Chen L. Testing the mean of skewed distributions. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90(430):567–576.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Adams J, Mehrotra A, Thomas JW, McGlynn EA. Physician cost profiling—reliability and risk of misclassification. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(11):1014–1021.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Adams J, Mehrotra A, Thomas JW, McGlynn EA. Physician cost profiling—reliability and risk of misclassification. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(11):1014–1021.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Hardee JT, Kasper IK. A clinical communication strategy to enhance effectiveness and CAHPS scores: the ALERT model. Perm J. 2008;12(3):70–74.PubMedCentralPubMed Hardee JT, Kasper IK. A clinical communication strategy to enhance effectiveness and CAHPS scores: the ALERT model. Perm J. 2008;12(3):70–74.PubMedCentralPubMed
49.
go back to reference Ngo-Metzger Q, Telfair J, Sorkin D, Weidmer B, Weech-Maldonado R, Hurtado M, et al. Cultural competency and quality of care: obtaining the patient’s perspective. New York, NY: Commonwealth Fund 2006 Contract No.: 963. Ngo-Metzger Q, Telfair J, Sorkin D, Weidmer B, Weech-Maldonado R, Hurtado M, et al. Cultural competency and quality of care: obtaining the patient’s perspective. New York, NY: Commonwealth Fund 2006 Contract No.: 963.
51.
52.
go back to reference Roland M, Elliott M, Lyratzopoulos G, Barbiere J, Parker RA, Smith P, et al. Reliability of patient responses in pay for performance schemes: analysis of national general practitioner patient survey data in England. BMJ. 2009;339:b3851. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3851.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Roland M, Elliott M, Lyratzopoulos G, Barbiere J, Parker RA, Smith P, et al. Reliability of patient responses in pay for performance schemes: analysis of national general practitioner patient survey data in England. BMJ. 2009;339:b3851. doi:10.​1136/​bmj.​b3851.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference Groves R, Peytcheva E. The impact of nonresponse rates on nonresponse bias: a meta-analysis. Public Opin Q. 2008;72(2):167–189.CrossRef Groves R, Peytcheva E. The impact of nonresponse rates on nonresponse bias: a meta-analysis. Public Opin Q. 2008;72(2):167–189.CrossRef
54.
go back to reference Klein DJ, Elliott MN, Haviland AM, Saliba D, Burkhart Q, Edwards C, et al. Understanding nonresponse to the 2007 Medicare CAHPS survey. The Gerontologist. 2011;51(6):843–855.PubMedCrossRef Klein DJ, Elliott MN, Haviland AM, Saliba D, Burkhart Q, Edwards C, et al. Understanding nonresponse to the 2007 Medicare CAHPS survey. The Gerontologist. 2011;51(6):843–855.PubMedCrossRef
57.
go back to reference Quigley DD, Martino SC, Brown JA, Hays RD. Evaluating the content of the communication items in the CAHPS(®) clinician and group survey and supplemental items with what high-performing physicians say they do. Patient. 2013;6(3):169–177.PubMedCrossRef Quigley DD, Martino SC, Brown JA, Hays RD. Evaluating the content of the communication items in the CAHPS(®) clinician and group survey and supplemental items with what high-performing physicians say they do. Patient. 2013;6(3):169–177.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Specialties Differ in Which Aspects of Doctor Communication Predict Overall Physician Ratings
Authors
Denise D. Quigley, PhD
Marc N. Elliott, PhD
Donna O. Farley, PhD
Q Burkhart, MS
Samuel A. Skootsky, MD
Ron D. Hays, PhD
Publication date
01-03-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2663-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2014

Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2014 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.