Patients’ Positions on the Degree of Trust to be Placed in Physicians

Author:

Muñoz Sastre Maria Teresa1,Kpanake Lonzozou2ORCID,Sorum Paul Clay3,Mullet Etienne4

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, University of Toulouse Jean-Jaurès, Toulouse, France

2. Department of Social Sciences and Communication, University of Québec - TELUQ, Montréal, QC, Canada

3. Department of Pediatrics, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA

4. Department of Ethics, Institute of Advanced Studies (EPHE), Paris, France

Abstract

Patient-physician relationship is ideally based on mutual trust. Trust usually takes times to build but can quite instantaneously be destroyed as a result of a single action or a single misperception. This study examined the way patients conceptualize the relationship between trust in a physician and perceived competency, honesty and openness, and personal involvement in care. One hundred sixty-seven patients aged 18–85 years were presented with a set of 27 three-item realistic vignettes that described situations in which participants could find themselves if hospitalized because of illness or accident. These scenarios resulted from the complete crossing of the three factors mentioned above. Participants were asked to assess the level of trust they would feel in each case. Through cluster analysis, three positions were found. For a minority of participants, trust was either unconditionally high (4%) or always quite low (8%). For a majority (75%), however, trust depended interactively on competency and honesty, on the one hand, and involvement, on the other hand; that is, the impact of competency and honesty on trust always depended on the level of involvement in care. In particular, when involvement had a low level, trust was always quite low, irrespective of the levels of both other factors. These findings are fully consistent with the view that, for a majority of patients, trust is inherently brittle: A breach in any one of participants’ expectations regarding physicians’ professionalism is enough to result in a more than proportional reduction in trust level.

Funder

Canada Research Chairs

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3