Taking into account patients’ communication preferences: instrument development and results in chronic back pain patients
Abstract
Objective The objective is to develop an instrument that measures the extent of matching between patient communication preferences and physician communication behavior and takes various essential aspects of patient-provider communication into consideration. Furthermore we give a description of communication preferences and matching for chronic back pain patients. Methods Using an existing questionnaire for assessing patient communication preferences (named KOPRA), a questionnaire on the communication behavior of physicians (KOVA questionnaire) was developed with identical contents. Combining KOPRA and KOVA items results in preference-matching items. N=703 patients were surveyed. Results After item selection all scales of the KOVA questionnaire are unidimensional, reliable, and satisfy the requirements of an item response theory model. The preference-matching scales are also unidimensional and reliable (Cronbach's alpha .87-.91). In addition, there is evidence of the validity of both instruments. Matching between communication preferences and behavior is relatively high overall, but there are some areas with clear discrepancies. Conclusion and practice implications The preference-matching scales allow areas to be identified in which physicians are not very successful in addressing the communication preferences of patients. With back pain patients, physicians should take particular consideration of the very great need for open communication and information about further treatme…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Validated research instruments were used to measure patient perceptions of physician interpersonal manner, empathy, and communication style, as well as pain catastrophizing and pain self-efficacy.
“Validated research instruments were used to measure patient perceptions of physician interpersonal manner, empathy, and communication style, as well as pain catastrophizing and pain self-efficacy.”
The Communication Behavior Questionnaire was developed and validated as a measure of patient preferences regarding physician communications pertaining to low back pain.
“The Communication Behavior Questionnaire was developed and validated as a measure of patient preferences regarding physician communications pertaining to low back pain [19].”
From The process and outcomes of chronic low back pain treatment provided by osteopathic and allopathic physicians: a retrospective cohort study (2023) · cites this paper as [19]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 50 · Cited by 32
- Authors
- Farin, E., Gramm, L., & Schmidt, E.
- Affiliations
- University Medical Center Freiburg (DE)
- Venue
- Patient Education and Counseling
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 41-48
- ISSN
- 0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020422387
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 4.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01 GX 0740)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
- Keywords
- patient-provider communication, chronic back pain, preference matching, instrument development, item response theory, open communication, treatment information
- MeSH terms
- Back Pain, Chronic Disease, Communication, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Patient Education as Topic, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Patient Satisfaction, Trust
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
