Empathy in Patient-clinician Interactions when Using Telecommunication: A Rapid Review of the Evidence

Overview

Journal PEC Innov

Specialty Health Services

Date 2022 Aug 23

PMID 35996734

Authors

Georgina Budd

Dan Griffiths

Jeremy Howick

Jane Vennik

Felicity L Bishop

Nancy Durieux

Hazel A Everitt

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the replacement of many face-to-face healthcare consultations with telephone consultations. Little is known about the extent to which empathy can be expressed in telephone consultations. Our objective is to review evidence related to empathy in telephone consultations including clinical outcomes, and patient/practitioner experiences.

Methods: Searches of Medline/Ovid and PsycINFO/Ovid were undertaken. Titles and abstract screening, data extraction, and risk of bias were undertaken by two reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved in discussion with additional reviewers. Included studies were specific to tele-communications with empirical data on empathy related to patient outcomes/views, published (in English), 2010-2021. Studies that did not mention empathy explicitly were excluded.

Results: Our search yielded 740 individual records and 8 studies (527 patients, 20 practitioners) met inclusion criteria: Some barriers to expression of empathy were noted, but no major obstacles were reported. However, data was sparse and most studies had a high risk of bias.

Conclusion: Empathy in telephone consultations is possible, (though the loss of non-verbal cues and touch can present barriers) however the research does not yet identify how.

Innovation: It is possible to establish and display empathy in telephone consultations, but future research needs to identify how this can be optimized.

Funding: This work was supported by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research grant (project number 389). The University of Southampton's Primary Care Department is a member of the NIHR School for Primary Care Research and supported by NIHR Research funds. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. PROSPERO (CRD42021238087).

Citing Articles

Talking in primary care (TIP): protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial in UK primary care to assess clinical and cost-effectiveness of communication skills e-learning for practitioners on patients' musculoskeletal pain and enablement.

Bishop F, Cross N, Dewar-Haggart R, Teasdale E, Herbert A, Robinson M BMJ Open. 2024; 14(3):e081932.

PMID: 38508652 PMC: 10953007. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081932.

References

Barnes R, Cramer H, Thomas C, Sanderson E, Hollinghurst S, Metcalfe C . A consultation-level intervention to improve care of frequently attending patients: a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial. BJGP Open. 2019; 3(1):bjgpopen18X101623. PMC: 6480855. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen18X101623. View

Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H . Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci. 2010; 5:56. PMC: 2914085. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-56. View

Arullapan N, Chersich M, Mashabane N, Richter M, Geffen N, Veary J . Quality of counselling and support provided by the South African National AIDS Helpline: Content analysis of mystery client interviews. S Afr Med J. 2018; 108(7):596-602. DOI: 10.7196/SAMJ.2018.v108i7.12543. View

Irvine A, Drew P, Bower P, Brooks H, Gellatly J, Armitage C . Are there interactional differences between telephone and face-to-face psychological therapy? A systematic review of comparative studies. J Affect Disord. 2020; 265:120-131. PMC: 7049904. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.057. View

Torres-Vigil I, Cohen M, Million R, Bruera E . The role of empathic nursing telephone interventions with advanced cancer patients: A qualitative study. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2020; 50:101863. PMC: 7946749. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2020.101863. View

Sturzu L, Lala A, Bisch M, Guitter M, Dobre D, Schwan R . Empathy and Burnout - A Cross-Sectional Study Among Mental Healthcare Providers in France. J Med Life. 2019; 12(1):21-29. PMC: 6527412. DOI: 10.25122/jml-2018-0050. View

Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K, Riitano D, Tufanaru C . Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015; 13(3):147-53. DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000054. View

Wittenberg E, Goldsmith J, Chen C, Prince-Paul M, Johnson R . Opportunities to improve COVID-19 provider communication resources: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2021; 104(3):438-451. PMC: 7831717. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.031. View

Downes M, Mervin M, Byrnes J, Scuffham P . Telephone consultations for general practice: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2017; 6(1):128. PMC: 5496327. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0529-0. View

10.

Dion S, Wiebe E, Kelly M . Quality of care with telemedicine for medical assistance in dying eligibility assessments: a mixed-methods study. CMAJ Open. 2019; 7(4):E721-E729. PMC: 6910140. DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20190111. View

11.

Mesters I, van Keulen H, de Vries H, Brug J . Counselor competence for telephone Motivation Interviewing addressing lifestyle change among Dutch older adults. Eval Program Plann. 2017; 65:47-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.06.005. View

12.

Suarez-Almazor M, Looney C, Liu Y, Cox V, Pietz K, Marcus D . A randomized controlled trial of acupuncture for osteoarthritis of the knee: effects of patient-provider communication. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010; 62(9):1229-36. PMC: 3651275. DOI: 10.1002/acr.20225. View

13.

Thomas K . General practice consultations: is there any point in being positive?. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1987; 294(6581):1200-2. PMC: 1246362. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.294.6581.1200. View

14.

Howick J, Bizzari V, Dambha-Miller H . Therapeutic empathy: what it is and what it isn't. J R Soc Med. 2018; 111(7):233-236. PMC: 6047267. DOI: 10.1177/0141076818781403. View

15.

Kennedy N, Steinberg A, Arnold R, Doshi A, White D, DeLair W . Perspectives on Telephone and Video Communication in the Intensive Care Unit during COVID-19. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020; 18(5):838-847. PMC: 8086546. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202006-729OC. View

16.

Howick J, Steinkopf L, Ulyte A, Roberts N, Meissner K . How empathic is your healthcare practitioner? A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient surveys. BMC Med Educ. 2017; 17(1):136. PMC: 5563892. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-017-0967-3. View

17.

Howick J, Moscrop A, Mebius A, Fanshawe T, Lewith G, Bishop F . Effects of empathic and positive communication in healthcare consultations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Soc Med. 2018; 111(7):240-252. PMC: 6047264. DOI: 10.1177/0141076818769477. View

18.

Sterne J, Hernan M, Reeves B, Savovic J, Berkman N, Viswanathan M . ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016; 355:i4919. PMC: 5062054. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i4919. View

19.

McMaster T, Wright T, Mori K, Stelmach W, To H . Current and future use of telemedicine in surgical clinics during and beyond COVID-19: A narrative review. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021; 66:102378. PMC: 8105355. DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102378. View

20.

Hakansson Eklund J, Summer Meranius M . Toward a consensus on the nature of empathy: A review of reviews. Patient Educ Couns. 2020; 104(2):300-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.08.022. View