4.5 Article

The effects of physicians' affect-oriented communication style and raising expectations on analogue patients' anxiety, affect and expectancies

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 80, 期 3, 页码 300-306

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.017

关键词

Physician patient communication; Placebo effect; Affect; Expectancy; State anxiety; Analogue patients

资金

  1. Dutch Research Council (NWO)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Patients' affect and expectancies can set off placebo effects and thus impact patients' health. We assessed the relative effects of physicians' affect-oriented communication style and raising expectations on patients' affective state and outcome expectancies. Method: Thirty healthy women presented severe menstrual pain in a scripted consultation with a general practitioner (GP). In a 2 x 2 randomized controlled trial, the GP communicated in a warm, empathic or cold, formal way and raised positive or uncertain expectations. Effects on subjects' state anxiety, affective state and outcome expectancies were assessed. Results: Only warm, empathic communication combined with positive expectations led to a significant and relevant decrease in state anxiety. Subjects' positive and negative affects were influenced by GPs affect-oriented communication style. Negative affect and outcome expectancies are influenced by GP suggestions about outcomes. Conclusion: Manipulations in physicians' affect-oriented and expectancy-related communication can have a large impact on patients' affective state and outcome expectations. A combination of a warm, empathic communication style and raising positive expectations resulted in optimal subject outcomes. Practice implications: Physicians should take into account that communicating in warm, empathic way combined with raising positive expectations seems to lead to the most favorable effects on patients' state anxiety and outcome expectancies. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据