IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v26y2006i2p122-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient-Physician Fit: An Exploratory Study of a Multidimensional Instrument

Author

Listed:
  • Alan Schwartz

    (Department of Medical Education (mc 591), 808 S. Wood St., 986 CME, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612 alansz@uic.edu)

  • Memoona Hasnain

    (Department of Family Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago)

  • Arnold R. Eiser

    (Department of Medical Education, Mercy Catholic Medical Center and Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

  • Elizabeth Lincoln

    (Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut)

  • Arthur S. Elstein

    (Department of Medical Education, University of Illinois at Chicago)

Abstract

Background . Patients face difficulty selecting physicians because they have little knowledge of how physicians’ behaviors fit with their own preferences. Objective . To develop scales of patient and physician behavior preferences and determine whether patient-physician fit is associated with patient satisfaction. Design . Two cross-sectional surveys of patients and providers. Setting . Ambulatory clinics at a university medical center. Participants . Eight general internists, 14 family physicians, and 193 patients. Measurements . Two instruments were developed to measure 6 preferences for physician behaviors: 1) considering nonmedical aspects of the patient’s life, 2) familiarity with herbal medicine, 3) physician decision making, 4) providing information, 5) considering the patient’s religion, and 6) treating what the patient perceives as his or her problem. Patients reported how they would prefer physicians to behave, and physicians reported how they preferred to behave. Patients also rated satisfaction with their physician. Results . Post hoc tests found that as a group, patients scored higher than physicians in preference for the physician to provide information and lower in preference for considering nonmedical aspects of the patient’s life and religious beliefs. As hypothesized, preference differences accounted for significant variance in satisfaction in overall tests (19% in the family medicine patients and 25% in internal medicine patients). Greater satisfaction was associated with fit between patient and physician preferences for physician decision making (in the internal medicine patients) and with fit in providing information and consideration of religion (in family medicine patients) Conclusions. Patients often prefer behaviors other than how their physicians prefer to behave. Preference fit is associated with enhanced patient satisfaction. Physicians should attend to whether patients want religion and other nonmedical aspects of their lives considered. Health plans may wish to provide tools to help patients choose physicians by fit

Suggested Citation

  • Alan Schwartz & Memoona Hasnain & Arnold R. Eiser & Elizabeth Lincoln & Arthur S. Elstein, 2006. "Patient-Physician Fit: An Exploratory Study of a Multidimensional Instrument," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(2), pages 122-133, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:122-133
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06286476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X06286476
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X06286476?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weisman, Carol S. & Teitelbaum, Martha Ann, 1985. "Physician gender and the physician-patient relationship: Recent evidence and relevant questions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 20(11), pages 1119-1127, January.
    2. Finkler, Kaja & Correa, Maria, 1996. "Factors influencing patient perceived recovery in Mexico," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 199-207, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Underman, Kelly & Hirshfield, Laura E., 2016. "Detached concern?: Emotional socialization in twenty-first century medical education," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 94-101.
    2. Miraldo, M & Galizzi, M & Stavropoulou, C, 2013. "Doctor-patient differences in risk preferences, and their links to decision-making: a field experiment," Working Papers 12578, Imperial College, London, Imperial College Business School.
    3. Neena Kohli & Ajit K. Dalal, 1998. "Culture as a Factor in Causal Understanding of Illness : A Study of Cancer Patients," Psychology and Developing Societies, , vol. 10(2), pages 115-129, September.
    4. Benjamin Ho & Elaine Liu, 2011. "What's an Apology Worth? Decomposing the Effect of Apologies on Medical Malpractice Payments Using State Apology Laws," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(s1), pages 179-199, December.
    5. Mujaheed Shaikh & Marisa Miraldo & Anna-Theresa Renner, 2018. "Waiting time at health facilities and social class: Evidence from the Indian caste system," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:122-133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.