LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Fitzgerald, Niamh M.; Heywood, Susie; Bikker, Annemieke P.; Mercer, Stewart W. (2014)
Publisher: BioMed Central
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Background The importance of empathic, person-centred care that is responsive to the individual patients’ needs is increasingly visible in national and international healthcare policies but there is a need for practical tools to help healthcare practitioners. The CARE Approach is a new ‘generic’ learning tool that aims to foster the achievement of empathic, person-centred communication in healthcare encounters. This study aimed to evaluate a pilot project which used the CARE Approach in peer facilitated groups in primary and community healthcare settings in Scotland.

\ud \ud Methods The CARE Approach was piloted in 5 sites (4 general practice and 1 community rehabilitation team) serving different areas and populations. Evaluation employed a mixed-methods approach, with questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of participating facilitators and healthcare practitioners.

\ud \ud Results 131 practitioners took part in the CARE Approach pilot across the five sites. 84 participants (64.1%) completed a baseline questionnaire and 51 (38.9%) a post-pilot questionnaire. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with all facilitators and with a purposive sample of 23 participants from the sites. Overall the results indicate that the CARE Approach was perceived as useful and relevant to practice across different disciplines and settings. The flexibility of the CARE Approach materials facilitated its delivery and implementation across the sites. Healthcare professionals’ self-perceived empathy at baseline and follow-up suggested a possible impact on daily practice.

\ud \ud Conclusions The CARE Approach appears to be useful to practitioners in primary and community care and can feasibly be delivered in peer facilitated learning groups. Further work is required to determine the utility of the approach when used in other ways and in other settings and to ascertain the effectiveness of the approach in the longer-term.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. World Health Organisation: Primary care: Putting people first in The world health report 2008: Primary Health Care, Now more than ever. Geneva: WHO; 2008.
    • 2. The Scottish Government: The Healthcare Quality Strategy for NHSScotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government; 2010.
    • 3. Department of health [England]: Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS. London: Department of Health; 2010.
    • 4. Welsh Government: Working Differently - Working Together, A Workforce and Organisational Development Framework. Cardiff: Welsh Government; 2012.
    • 5. Campbell SM, Roland MO, Buetow S: Defining quality of care. Soc Sci Med 2000, 51:1611-1625.
    • 6. Mercer SW, Reynolds W: Empathy and quality of care. BJGP 2002, 52(Supplement):S9-S12.
    • 7. Mercer SW, Howie JGR: CQI-2, a new measure of holistic, interpersonal care in primary care consultations. BJGP 2006, 56(525):262-268.
    • 8. Mercer SW, Watt GCM, Maxwell M, Heaney DH: The development and preliminary validation of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure: an empathy-based consultation process measure. Fam Pract 2004, 21(6):699-705.
    • 9. Mercer SW, McConnachie A, Maxwell M, Heaney DH, Watt GCM: Relevance and performance of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure in general practice. Fam Pract 2005, 22(3):328-334.
    • 10. Aomatsu M, Abe H, Yasui H, Suzuki T, Sato J, Ban N, Mercer SW: Validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the CARE Measure in a general medicine outpatient setting. Fam Pract 2013, [e-pub ahead of print].
    • 11. Mercer SW, Fung CSF, Chan FWK, Wong FYY, Wong SYS, Murphy D: The Chinese-version of the CARE Measure reliably differentiates between doctors in primary care. BMC Fam Pract 2011, 12:43.
    • 12. Neumann M, Wirtz M, Bollschweiler E, Warm M, Wolf J, Pfaff H: Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschen Version des Messinstruments “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) am Beispiel von Krebspatienten. / Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) measure at the example of cancer patients. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 2008, 58:5-15.
    • 13. Little P, Everitt H, Williamson I, Moore M, Warner G, Gould C, Ferrier K, Payne S: Observational study of effect of patient-centredness and positive approach in primary care on outcomes of primary care consultations. BMJ 2001, 323:908-911.
    • 14. Griffin S, Kinmonth A, Veltman M, Gillard S, Grant J, Stewart M: Effect on health-related outcomes of interventions to alter the interaction between patients and practitioners: a systematic review of trials. Ann Fam Med 2004, 2:595-608. Ann Fam Med 2004; 2:595-608.
    • 15. Bikker AP, Mercer SW, Reilly D: A pilot prospective study on the consultation and relational empathy, patient enablement, and health changes over 12 months, in patients going to the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital. J Alt Comp Med 2005, 11(4):591-600.
    • 16. Mercer SW, Neumann M, Wirtz W, Fitzpatrick B, Vojt G: Effect of General Practitioner empathy on patient enablement, and patient-reported outcomes in primary care in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland - a pilot prospective study using structural equation modelling. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 73:240-245.
    • 17. Derksen F, Bensing J, Lagro-Janssen A: Effectiveness of empathy in general practice: a systematic review. BJGP 2013, 63(606):76-84.
    • 18. Rakel D, Barrett B, Zhang Z, Hoeft T, Chewning B, Marchand L, Scheder J: Perception of empathy in the therapeutic encounter: effects on the common cold. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 85(3):390-397.
    • 19. Hojat M, Louis DZ, Markham FW, Wender R, Rabinowitz C, Gonnella JS: Physicians' empathy and clinical outcomes for diabetic patients. Acad Med 2011, 86(3):359-364.
    • 20. Neumann M, Bensing J, Mercer S, Ernstmann N, Ommen O, Pfaff H: Analyzing the “nature” and “specific effectiveness” of clinical empathy: a theoretical overview and contribution towards a theory-based research agenda. Patient Educ Couns 2009, 74:339-346.
    • 21. Mercer SW, Jani B, Wong SY, Watt GCM: Patient enablement requires physician empathy: a cross-sectional study of general.practice consultations in areas of high and low socioeconomic deprivation in Scotland. BMC Fam Pract 2012, 13:6.
    • 22. Neumann M, Edelhauser F, Tauschel D, Fischer MR, Wirtz M, Woopen C, Haramati A, Scheffer C: Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med 2011, 86(8):996-1009.
    • 23. Riess H, Kelley JM, Bailey RW, Dunn EJ, Phillips M: Empathy training for resident physicians: a randomized controlled trial of a neuroscienceinformed curriculum. J Gen Intern Med 2012, 27(10):1280-1286.
    • 24. Batt-Rawden SA, Chisholm MS, Anton B, Flickinger TE: Teaching empathy to medical students: an updated systematic review. Acad Med 2013, 88(8):1171-1177.
    • 25. Dwamena F, Holmes-Rovner M, Gaulden C, Jorgenson S, Sadigh G, Sikorski A, Lewin S, Smith RC, Coffey J, Olomu A: Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD003267. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003267.pub2.
    • 26. Bikker AP, Mercer SW, Cotton P: Connecting, Assessing, Responding and Empowering (CARE): a universal approach to person-centred, empathic healthcare encounters. Educ Prim Care 2012, 23(6):454-457.
    • 27. Bikker AP, Cotton P, Mercer SW: Embracing Empathy in Healthcare. A Universal Approach To Person-Centred, Empathic Healthcare Encounters. London, New York: Radcliffe; 2014. ISBN-13: 978 190936 8187.
    • 28. Health Research Authority: Is My Project Research? Decision Tool; [http:// www.hra-decisiontools.org.uk/research/ Accessed 28th August, 2014]
    • 29. Thomas DR: A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am J Eval 2006, 27(2):237-246.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article