Patient’s perception of the communication of clinical doctors and surgeons in a university hospital

• Autor(a) principal: Perez,Milena Regina Dos Santos
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Outros Autores: Oliveira,Mirele Cristine Santos de, Ortiz,Danielle Bispo Vieira, Peña,Stela Souza, Job,Jose Roberto Pretel Pereira, Gianini,Reinaldo José
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-55022021000200207
• topic: Medical Specialties; Health Communication; Doctor-Patient Relationships

Abstract: Introduction: The way information is transmitted is of crucial importance in the doctor-patient relationship, as good communication reduces complaints about inadequate practices and patient concerns and improves treatment adherence and health recovery. However, patient dissatisfaction on this subject is not unusual. Objectives: The objective of this work was to evaluate the perception of patients admitted to a Hospital Complex about the communication of clinical doctors and surgeons during the hospitalization period. Method: Cross-sectional, descriptive, analytical inquiry study, with the application of a questionnaire with questions about physicians’ general communication. The instrument was built by the researchers and was answered by 120 adult patients. The sample was defined by convenience and stratified by medical and surgical clinic. Frequency and statistical analyses were performed on the obtained results. Results: Of 120 patients, 53.33%(n=64) were admitted to the Surgical Clinic and 46.67%(n=56) to the Medical Clinic. Of this total, 57.5%(n=69) had high school to college/university education. Patients reported more negative than positive responses to the following questions: information about the side effects of medications (66%), advice on post-surgical procedures (68.75%) and information on health promotion and prevention in the hospital environment (63.33%). The surgical clinic had significantly lower proportions of positive responses for: The doctor said their name (p <0.01; crude OR: 0.33; 95% CI 0.15-0.76); The patient was informed about how their treatment would be conducted (p=0.02; crude OR: 0.38; 95% CI 0.17-0.87); and the patient was informed about the need to undergo tests (p=0.02; crude OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.18-0.90), which remained significant after adjustment for certain confounding factors. There were no significant differences regarding the other questions. When analyzing the question: “What grade would you give to the doctor’s general communication?” a significantly higher value (p=0.007) was given to the Medical Clinic (average 4.46±0.76) when compared to the Surgical Clinic (average 4±1.19). Conclusion: The doctor-patient communication showed significant deficits. Therefore, it is necessary for medical schools to offer students the development of this competence. Additionally, for an adequate generalization of the obtained results, new studies need to be carried out at different levels of medical care.