↓ Skip to main content

Managing barriers to empathy in the clinical encounter: a qualitative interview study with GPs

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 Mendeley
Title
Managing barriers to empathy in the clinical encounter: a qualitative interview study with GPs
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, October 2016
DOI 10.3399/bjgp16x687565
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frans Awm Derksen, Tim C Olde Hartman, Jozien M Bensing, Antoine Lm Lagro-Janssen

Abstract

Current daily general practice has become increasingly technical and somatically oriented (where attention to patients' feelings is decreased) due to an increase in protocol-based guidelines. Priorities in GP-patient communication have shifted from a focus on listening and empathy to task-oriented communication. To explore what barriers GPs experience when applying empathy in daily practice, and how these barriers are managed. Thirty Dutch GPs with sufficient heterogeneity in sex, age, type of practice, and rural or urban setting were interviewed. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) were applied. The verbatim transcripts were then analysed. According to participating GPs, the current emphasis on protocol-driven care can be a significant barrier to genuineness in communication. Other potential barriers mentioned were time pressures and constraints, and dealing with patients displaying 'unruly behaviour' or those with personality disorders. GPs indicated that it can be difficult to balance emotional involvement and professional distance. Longer consulting times, smaller practice populations, and efficient practice organisation were described as practical solutions. In order to focus on a patient-as-person approach, GPs strongly suggested that deviating from guidelines should be possible when necessary as an element of good-quality care. Joining intercollegiate counselling groups was also discussed. In addition to practical solutions for barriers to behaving empathically, GPs indicated that they needed more freedom to balance working with protocols and guidelines, as well as a patient-as-person and patient-as-partner approach. This balance is necessary to remain connected with patients and to deliver care that is truly personal.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 131 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 15%
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 12%
Researcher 9 7%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 32 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 23%
Psychology 17 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 11 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 41 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,476,723
of 24,846,849 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#1,527
of 4,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,943
of 326,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#36
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,846,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.