Top

Published in:

01-01-2019 | Original Research

Physician Empathy Is Not Associated with Laboratory Outcomes in Diabetes: a Cross-sectional Study

Authors: Alexander Chaitoff, MPH, Michael B. Rothberg, MD, MPH, Amy K. Windover, PhD, Leonard Calabrese, DO, Anita D. Misra-Hebert, MD, MPH, Kathryn A. Martinez, PhD, MPH

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Background

One widely cited study suggested a link between physician empathy and laboratory outcomes in patients with diabetes, but its findings have not been replicated. While empathy has a positive impact on patient experience, its impact on other outcomes remains unclear.

Objective

To assess associations between physician empathy and glycosylated hemoglobin (HgbA1c) as well as low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels in patients with diabetes.

Design

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

Participants

Patients with diabetes who received care at a large integrated health system in the USA between January 1, 2011, and May 31, 2014, and their primary care physicians.

Main Measures

The main independent measure was physician empathy, as measured by the Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE). The JSE is scored on a scale of 20–140, with higher scores indicating greater empathy. Dependent measures included patient HgbA1c and LDL. Mixed-effects linear regression models adjusting for patient sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity index, and physician characteristics were used to assess the association between physician JSE scores and their patients’ HgbA1c and LDL.

Key Results

The sample included 4176 primary care patients who received care with one of 51 primary care physicians. Mean physician JSE score was 118.4 (standard deviation (SD) = 12). Median patient HgbA1c was 6.7% (interquartile range (IQR) = 6.2–7.5) and median LDL concentration was 83 (IQR = 66–104). In adjusted analyses, there was no association between JSE scores and HgbA1c (β = − 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.04, 0.02, p = 0.47) or LDL (β = 0.41, 95%CI = − 0.47, 1.29, p = 0.35).

Conclusion

Physician empathy was not associated with HgbA1c or LDL. While interventions to increase physician empathy may result in more patient-centered care, they may not improve clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes.

Doyle C, Lennox L, Bell D. A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness. BMJ Open. 2013;3(1):e001570.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Beck RS, Daughtridge R, Sloane PD. Physician-patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2002;15(1):25–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.CrossRefPubMed

Blais L, Bourbeau J, Sheehy O. Inhaled corticosteroids in COPD. Trends in patient’s persistence on treatment and determinants of use. Can Respir J. 2003;11:27–32.CrossRef

Mann DM, Allegrante JP, Natarajan S, Halm EA, Charlson M. Predictors of adherence to statins for primary prevention. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2007;21(4):311–316.CrossRefPubMed

Balkrishnan R. Predictors of medication adherence in the elderly. Clin Ther. 1998;20(4):764–771.CrossRefPubMed

Dimatteo MR, Giordani PJ, Lepper HS, Croghan TW. Patient adherence and medical treatment outcomes a meta-analysis. Med Care. 2002 40:794–811.CrossRefPubMed

Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner A, et al. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pr. 2000;49(9):796–804.

Stewart MA. Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review. CMAJ. 1995;152(9):1423–1433. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1337906/pdf/cmaj00069-0061.pdf.PubMedCentralPubMed

Kim SS, Kaplowitz S, Johnston MV. The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof. 2004;27(3):237–251.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Chaitoff A, Sun B, Windover A, et al. Associations between physician empathy, physician characteristics, and standardized measures of patient experience. Acad Med. 2017: 92:1464-1471. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001671.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Yuguero O, Marsal JR, Esquerda M, Soler-González J. Occupational burnout and empathy influence blood pressure control in primary care physicians. BMC Fam Pract. 2017;18(1):63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-017-0634-0.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

12.

Yuguero O, Melnick ER, Marsal JR, Esquerda M, Soler-Gonzalez J. Cross-sectional study of the association between healthcare professionals’ empathy and burnout and the number of annual primary care visits per patient under their care in Spain. BMJ Open. 2018;8(7):e020949.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Gascón JJ, Sanchez-Ortuno M, Llor B, Skidmore D, Saturno PJ. Why hypertensive patients do not comply with the treatment: results from a qualitative study. Fam Pract. 2004;21(2):125–130.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Stein T, Frankel RM, Krupat E. Enhancing clinician communication skills in a large healthcare organization: a longitudinal case study. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58(1):4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.01.014.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Levinson W, Lesser CS, Epstein RM. Developing physician communication skills for patient-centered care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1310–1318. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0450.CrossRef

16.

Kelm Z, Womer J, Walter JK, Feudtner C. Interventions to cultivate physician empathy: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14(1):219. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-219.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

17.

Boissy A, Windover AK, Bokar D, et al. Communication skills training for physicians improves patient satisfaction. J Gen Intern Med. 2016:31:755-61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Geiss LS, Kirtland K, Lin J, et al. Changes in diagnosed diabetes, obesity, and physical inactivity prevalence in US counties, 2004-2012. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0173428.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Blonde L, Aschner P, Bailey C, et al. Gaps and barriers in the control of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Vasc Dis Res. 2017;14(3):172–183.CrossRef

20.

Schillinger D, Piette J, Grumbach K, et al. Closing the loop: physician communication with diabetic patients who have low health literacy. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(1):83–90.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Kruse RL, Olsberg JE, Shigaki CL, et al. Communication during patient-provider encounters regarding diabetes self-management. Fam Med. 2013;45(7):475–483.PubMed

22.

Bundesmann R, Kaplowitz SA. Provider communication and patient participation in diabetes self-care. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85(2):143–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2010.09.025.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Ware JE, 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.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Hojat M, Louis DZ, Markham FW, Wender R, Rabinowitz C, Gonnella JS. Physicians’ empathy and clinical outcomes for diabetic patients. Acad Med. 2011;86(3):359–364. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182086fe1.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Chou CL, Cooley L, Pearlman E, White MK. Enhancing patient experience by training local trainers in fundamental communication skills. Patient Exp J. 2014;1(2):36–45.

26.

Hojat M, Axelrod D, Spandorfer J, Mangione S. Enhancing and sustaining empathy in medical students. Med Teach. 2013;35(12):996–1001.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Tavakol S, Dennick R, Tavakol M. Psychometric properties and confirmatory factor analysis of the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11(1):54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ, Mangione S, Vergare M, Magee M. Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiatry. 2002;159(9):1563–1569. http://graphics.tx.ovid.com/ovftpdfs/FPDDNCGCGFLABD00/fs026/ovft/live/gv007/00000465/00000465-200209000-00016.pdf.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Hojat M. Empathy in Patient Care: Antecedents, Development, Measurement, and Outcomes. New York: Springer; 2007.

30.

Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes: A Patient-Centered Approach: Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2012;35(6):1364–1379. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-0413.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

31.

Street RL, Makoul G, Arora NK, Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician-patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74(3):295–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.11.015.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Zolnierek KBH, Dimatteo MR. Physician communication and patient adherence to treatment: a meta-analysis. Med Care. 2009;47(8):826–834. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819a5acc.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Epstein RM, Street RL. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9(2):100–103. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1239.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

34.

Jensen MD, Donna Ryan C-CH, Caroline Apovian C-CM, Jensen MD, et al. AHA/ACC/TOS Obesity Guideline 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS Guideline for the Management of Overweight and Obesity in Adults ACCF/AHA TASK FORCE MEMBERS Subcommittee on Prevention Guidelines. 2013.

35.

Salami JA, Warraich H, Valero-Elizondo J, et al. National trends in statin use and expenditures in the US adult population from 2002 to 2013: insights from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Jama Cardiol. 2017;2(1):56–65.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Van Herck P, De Smedt D, Annemans L, Remmen R, Rosenthal MB, Sermeus W. Systematic review: effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10(1):247.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Rundall TG, Shortell SM, Wang MC, et al. As good as it gets? Chronic care management in nine leading US physician organisations. BMJ Br Med J. 2002;325(7370):958.CrossRef

38.

Wadsworth T, Graves B, Glass S, Harrison AM, Donovan C, Proctor A. Using business intelligence to improve performance: Cleveland Clinic tracks KPIs daily to measure progress toward achieving the organization’s strategic objectives. This effort has helped reduce labor costs and other expenses--and improve quality of care. Healthc Financ Manag. 2009;63(10):68–73.

39.

Smith NC. Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psychological research. Am Psychol. 1970;25(10):970.CrossRef

40.

Moonesinghe R, Khoury MJ, Janssens ACJW. Most published research findings are false—but a little replication goes a long way. PLoS Med. 2007;4(2):e28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Ioannidis JPA, Ntzani EE, Trikalinos TA, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Replication validity of genetic association studies. Nat Genet. 2001;29(3):306–309.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Grimes DA, Schulz KF. False alarms and pseudo-epidemics: the limitations of observational epidemiology. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(4):920–927.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Ioannidis JPA, Chen J, Kodell R, Haug C, Hoey J. Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

44.

Young SS, Karr A. Deming, data and observational studies. Significance. 2011;8(3):116–120.CrossRef

45.

Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC. Why don’t we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(8):1261–1267.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Franco A, Malhotra N, Simonovits G. Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science (80- ). 2014;345(6203):1502–1505.CrossRef

47.

Simmons JP, Nelson LD, Simonsohn U. False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychol Sci. 2011;22(11):1359–1366.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Martin GN, Clarke RM. Are psychology journals anti-replication? A snapshot of editorial practices. Front Psychol. 2017;8.

49.

Silberzahn R, Uhlmann EL, Martin D, et al. Many analysts, one dataset: Making transparent how variations in analytical choices affect results. 2017.

50.

Bommer C, Heesemann E, Sagalova V, et al. The global economic burden of diabetes in adults aged 20–79 years: a cost-of-illness study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5(6):423–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30097-9.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Del Canale S, Louis DZ, Maio V, et al. The Relationship Between Physician Empathy and Disease Complications. Acad Med. 2012;87(9):1243–1249. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182628fbf.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Williams JS, Walker RJ, Smalls BL, Hill R, Egede LE. Patient-Centered Care, Glycemic Control, Diabetes Self-Care, and Quality of Life in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(10):644–649. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2016.0079.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

53.

Tuerk PW, Mueller M, Egede L. Estimating physician effects on glycemic control in the treatment of diabetes: methods, effects sizes, and implications for treatment policy. Diabetes Care. 2008.

54.

Derksen F, Bensing J, Lagro-Janssen A. Effectiveness of empathy in general practice: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2013;63(606):76–84. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp13X660814.CrossRef

55.

Jackson JL, Chamberlin J, Kroenke K. Predictors of patient satisfaction. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52(4):609–620.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Laveist TA, Nuru-Jeter A. Is doctor-patient race concordance associated with greater satisfaction with care? J Health Soc Behav. 2002;43:296–306. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090205.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Cooper-Patrick L, Gallo JJ, Gonzales JJ, et al. Race, gender, and partnership in the patient-physician relationship. JAMA. 1999;282(6):583–589.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Jackson JL, Kroenke K. Patient satisfaction and quality of care. Mil Med. 1997;162(4):273–277.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Reid RO, Friedberg MW, Adams JL, McGlynn EA, Mehrotra A. Associations between physician characteristics and quality of care. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(16):1442–1449.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Hojat M, Louis DZ, Maxwell K, Markham F, Wender R, Gonnella JS. Patient perceptions of physician empathy, satisfaction with physician, interpersonal trust, and compliance. Int J Med Educ. 2010;1:83.CrossRefPubMedCentral

61.

Kane GC, Gotto JL, West S, Hojat M, Mangione S. Jefferson Scale of Patient’s Perceptions of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometric data. Croat Med J. 2007;48(1):81–86.PubMedCentralPubMed

62.

Bernardo MO, Cecílio-Fernandes D, Costa P, Quince TA, Costa MJ, Carvalho-Filho MA. Physicians’ self-assessed empathy levels do not correlate with patients’ assessments. PLoS One. 2018;13(5):e0198488.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Taylor SJ, Barker LA, Heavey L, McHale S. The longitudinal development of social and executive functions in late adolescence and early adulthood. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015;9:252.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Lawrence EJ, Shaw P, Baker D, Baron-Cohen S, David AS. Measuring empathy: reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient. Psychol Med. 2004;34(5):911–920.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Lor KB, Truong JT, Ip EJ, Barnett MJ. A randomized prospective study on outcomes of an empathy intervention among second-year student pharmacists. Am J Pharm Educ. 2015;79(2):18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Quince TA, Parker RA, Wood DF, Benson JA. Stability of empathy among undergraduate medical students: a longitudinal study at one UK medical school. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11(1):90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

67.

Nakano EV. The effect of clinical experience on perceived and self-reported empathy in novice speech-language pathology clinicians. 2017.

Title: Physician Empathy Is Not Associated with Laboratory Outcomes in Diabetes: a Cross-sectional Study
Authors: Alexander Chaitoff, MPH
Michael B. Rothberg, MD, MPH
Amy K. Windover, PhD
Leonard Calabrese, DO
Anita D. Misra-Hebert, MD, MPH
Kathryn A. Martinez, PhD, MPH
Publication date: 01-01-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4731-0

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Physician Empathy Is Not Associated with Laboratory Outcomes in Diabetes: a Cross-sectional Study

Abstract

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Main Measures

Key Results

Conclusion

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Main Measures

Key Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Living Fully with Sickle Cell Disease

Use of Computerized Clinical Decision Support for Diagnostic Stewardship in Clostridioides difficile testing: an Academic Hospital Quasi-Experimental Study

Inequalities in Young Adult Health Insurance Coverage Post-federal Health Reform

Community Health Centers Could Provide Better Outsourced Primary Care for Veterans

Go Slow to Go Fast: Successful Engagement Strategies for Patient-Centered, Multi-Site Research, Involving Academic and Community-Based Organizations

Primary Care Transformation and Physician Burnout

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page