Physician Communication Coaching Effects On Patient Experience

Communication plays a huge role in the health care field. Communication between physician and patient is an important part when it comes to high quality care (Seiler et al., 2017). This scholarly research article, Physician Communication Coaching Effects on Patient Experience, is a quasi-experimental study. In this study, they tested to see if patient experience and perception could be affected by physicians who were placed through a clinical intervention training module about communication behaviors.

Patient experience and perception is a way of measuring the performance of the care provider. This can be measured through surveys. The researchers of this study used two surveys. First of which being the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare

The physician-training module is an “etiquette-based” stimulation and feedback method that teaches clinical communication. Studor Group’s AIDET was the basis of the training-module for physicians. It consisted of a lecture stating the importance of “etiquette-based” communication and structure performance of these skills. AIDET specific targets of basic communication are acknowledgement, introductions, duration, explanation, thank you, and non-verbal behavior (Seiler et al., 2017). It includes behaviors like knocking on patient’s door, asking to enter room, introducing oneself, sitting down, and explaining their role in care. Based on past study, it shows that one third of physicians did none of the “etiquette-based” behavior, but yet studies show that there is not effect if the clinical training has an effect on the patient experience. So, their hypothesis was if the clinical intervention stimulation was used it would improve patient’s experience and perception of the physician communication and the care

It was done fairly recently between the dates of January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013, but first it was approved by Baystate Health’s Institutional Review Board (Seiler et al., 2017). The researchers focused their study on two different groups. One of which included hospitalist and residents and the other is a group of surgeons. The group of surgeons is the control group of the study who did not receive the training intervention. Overall there are a total of 128 physicians that participated in the study. The procedure of the study was surveying the pre-and post-intervention of the physician training-module as stated above and comparing it to the control