HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) In Brief TRACK Comments: Submit a response TRACK Comments: View responses Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when TRACK Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fiscella, K. Articles by Epstein, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fiscella, K. Articles by Epstein, R.

Ratings of Physician Communication by Real and Standardized Patients

¹ University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY
² University of California Davis School of Medicine, Davis, Calif

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Kevin Fiscella, MD, MPH, 1381 South Ave, Rochester, NY 14620, Kevin_Fiscella{at}urmc.rochester.edu

PURPOSE Patient ratings of physician’s patient-centered communication are used by various specialty credentialing organizations and managed care organizations as a measure of physician communication skills. We wanted to compare ratings by real patients with ratings by standardized patients of physician communication.

METHODS We assessed physician communication using a modified version of the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ) among a sample of 100 community physicians. The HCCQ measures physician autonomy support, a key dimension in patient-centered communication. For each physician, the questionnaire was completed by roughly 49 real patients and 2 unannounced standardized patients. Standardized patients portrayed 2 roles: gastroesophageal disorder reflux symptoms and poorly characterized chest pain with multiple unexplained symptoms. We compared the distribution, reliability, and physician rank derived from using real and standardized patients after adjusting for patient, physician, and standardized patient effects.

RESULTS There were real and standardized patient ratings for 96 of the 100 physicians. Compared with standardized patient scores, real-patient–derived HCCQ scores were higher (mean 22.0 vs 17.2), standard deviations were lower (3.1 vs 4.9), and ranges were similar (both 5–25). Calculated real patient reliability, given 49 ratings per physician, was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–0.84) compared with the standardized patient reliability of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.39–0.73), given 2 ratings per physician. Spearman rank correlation between mean real patient and standardized patient scores was positive but small to moderate in magnitude, 0.28.

CONCLUSION Real patient and standardized patient ratings of physician communication style differ substantially and appear to provide different information about physicians’ communication style.

Key Words: Physician-patient relations • clinical competence • reproducibility of results • patient simulation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. H. McDaniel, D. Morse, R. Epstein, H. Beckman, D. B. Seaburn, and J. Silberman The Nuances of Self-disclosure--Reply Arch Intern Med, January 28, 2008; 168(2): 243 - 244. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. C. Stange On TRACK: Primary Care Opportunities for Filling Unmet Need Ann. Fam. Med, May 1, 2007; 5(3): 270 - 272. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. C. Stange and W. R. Phillips In This Issue: Real Change Is Real Hard in the Real World Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2007; 5(2): 98 - 100. [Full Text] [PDF]

TRACK Comments: