Cited by 91Empathy and Medical EducationPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Patient-rated physician empathy and patient satisfaction during pain clinic consultations

Walsh, Sarah, O’Neill, Aoife, Hannigan, Ailish, Harmon, Dominic·2019·Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)

Abstract

Background Little is known about the influence of patient-perceived healthcare provider empathy on patient satisfaction in the setting of a hospital pain clinic consultation. The objective of this research was to examine the relationship between patient-rated physician empathy and patient satisfaction after a single new pain clinic consultation. Methods After institutional ethics committee approval, a sample of 140 adult patients completed a two-page questionnaire, directly after a pain clinic consultation. This included a brief sociodemographic questionnaire, the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure and an overall satisfaction rating. Results The sample, N = 140 patients, was balanced for gender and 80% of participants ranged in age from 30 to 70. Of these patients, 80.7% had been living with chronic pain between 1 and 5 years. The data were deemed to be non-parametric and a Spearman's ranked order correlation analysis yielded a strong positive correlation between patient-rated physician empathy and patient consultation satisfaction. Conclusion Patient-rated physician empathy was strongly correlated with patient satisfaction in a pain clinic consultation. Patient satisfaction plays a significant role in adherence to treatment and contributes to a positive working patient-physician therapeutic relationship. This research supports the growing body of research citing the importance of investing in, promoting and developing educational programs for physicians and m…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11845-019-01999-5

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walsh, S., O’Neill, A., Hannigan, A., & Harmon, D.
Affiliations
University of Limerick (IE)
Corresponding author
Harmon, Dominic
Venue
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -)
Published
2019-03-27
Volume
188
Issue
4
Pages
1379-1384
ISSN
  • 0021-1265 (ISSN-L)
  • 1863-4362
OpenAlex
W2923832713
Cited by
91
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
FWCI
7.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
physician empathy, patient satisfaction, chronic pain, physician-patient relationship, empathic communication, CARE measure, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Care Facilities, Communication, Empathy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Referral and Consultation, Patient Satisfaction, Pain Clinics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review