Patient SatisfactionNCT00861991
Enhancing Empathy in Medical Communication Through Perspective-Taking
A study testing Perspective taking instruction in people with Patient Satisfaction, run by George Washington University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Background: Empathy is critical to clinician-patient communication and patient outcomes. Perspective-taking, an intervention demonstrated in other contexts to induce empathy, has never been studied in a medical context. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 45 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Patient Satisfaction
- What is being tested?
- Perspective taking instruction
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 608 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Jun 2006to Aug 2007
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 45 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- All third year medical and first and second year physician assistant students, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
Who cannot join
- None
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
George Washington University School of Medicine
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20037
About this study
Background: Empathy is critical to clinician-patient communication and patient outcomes. Perspective-taking, an intervention demonstrated in other contexts to induce empathy, has never been studied in a medical context. As a first step in evaluating its potential clinical value, the studies described below assess perspective taking in a series of clinical skills examinations. These examinations are simulated clinical encounters: students encounter and are evaluated by standardized patients (SPs)--actors trained to take on patient roles. Though not real clinical encounters, clinical skills examinations have been demonstrated to test clinical competency well enough to be incorporated into the licensure examination of the National Board of Medical Examiners.
Objective: To assess if perspective-taking improves the satisfaction of standardized patients in three clinical skills examinations.
Read more
Hypothesis: Students receiving a perspective taking intervention will receive better standardized patient satisfaction scores than control students.
Design and Setting: Three randomized, controlled studies. Studies 1 and 3: Junior medical students(N = 503), 6-station clinical skills examination. Study 2: physician assistant students (N = 105), 3-station clinical skills examination.
Intervention: The intervention students received a perspective-taking instruction prior to their examination asking them to put themselves in their "patients" shoes and to imagine what they were thinking and feeling. The control students received standard pre-examination instructions. Simulated patients were blind to study condition. Main Outcome Measure: Simulated patient satisfaction scores.
Read the detailed description
These studies assess the interaction of students and simulated patients (actors)--no real patients were involved.
- Conditions
- Patient Satisfaction
- Being tested
- Perspective taking instruction
- Keywords
- medical communication, empathy, medical education, standardized patients, enhancing "patient" satisfaction
- Medical subject headings
- Patient Satisfaction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Perspective taking instructionBehavioural
Students were asked to take the perspective of their standardized patients during clinical skills examinations
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Perspective taking intervention | Experimental | Students were given an instruction to take the perspectives of their standardized patients Receives: Behavioral: Perspective taking instruction |
| Control | Active comparator | Students given standard instructions Receives: Behavioral: Perspective taking instruction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
standardized patient satisfaction
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Mar 2009 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2006
- Primary completionAug 2007
- Study completionAug 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Patient SatisfactionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by George Washington UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 608 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- George Washington University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Benjamin C Blatt, MD, Study director, George Washington University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00861991
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PT2009
- Status last verified
- Mar 2009
- First submitted
- 27 Feb 2009
- Last updated
- 16 Mar 2009
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Mar 2009. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Enhancing Empathy in Medical Communication Through Perspective-Taking
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00861991
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PT2009
- Conditions
- Patient Satisfaction
- Keywords
- medical communication, empathy, medical education, standardized patients, enhancing "patient" satisfaction
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 608 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- George Washington UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2006
- Primary completion
- Aug 2007 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2007 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Mar 2009 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background: Empathy is critical to clinician-patient communication and patient outcomes. Perspective-taking, an intervention demonstrated in other contexts to induce empathy, has never been studied in a medical context. As a first step in evaluating its potential clinical value, the studies described below assess perspective taking in a series of clinical skills examinations. These examinations are simulated clinical encounters: students encounter and are evaluated by standardized patients (SPs)--actors trained to take on patient roles. Though not real clinical encounters, clinical skills examinations have been demonstrated to test clinical competency well enough to be incorporated into the licensure examination of the National Board of Medical Examiners.
Objective: To assess if perspective-taking improves the satisfaction of standardized patients in three clinical skills examinations.
Hypothesis: Students receiving a perspective taking intervention will receive better standardized patient satisfaction scores than control students.
Design and Setting: Three randomized, controlled studies. Studies 1 and 3: Junior medical students(N = 503), 6-station clinical skills examination. Study 2: physician assistant students (N = 105), 3-station clinical skills examination.
Intervention: The intervention students received a perspective-taking instruction prior to their examination asking them to put themselves in their "patients" shoes and to imagine what they were thinking and feeling. The control students received standard pre-examination instructions. Simulated patients were blind to study condition. Main Outcome Measure: Simulated patient satisfaction scores.
Detailed description
These studies assess the interaction of students and simulated patients (actors)--no real patients were involved.
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Perspective taking intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: Perspective taking instructionStudents were given an instruction to take the perspectives of their standardized patients |
| Control | Active comparator | Behavioral: Perspective taking instructionStudents given standard instructions |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 45 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All third year medical and first and second year physician assistant students, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Perspective taking instructionStudents were asked to take the perspective of their standardized patients during clinical skills examinations | Behavioural | Control, Perspective taking intervention |
Primary outcome
standardized patient satisfaction
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Mar 2009.
Related trials for Patient Satisfaction
RecruitingObservational study
Non-interventional Study of Subcutaneous Ocrelizumab in Persons With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis
Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis
Not yet recruiting
Efficacy, Safety, and Treatment Satisfaction of Once-Weekly Tirzepatide in Obese Type 2 Diabetic Patients
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), Obesity, Overweight
RecruitingObservational study
Patient Satisfaction Following Multidisciplinary Cancer Care Assessment in Day Hospital.
Patient Satisfaction, Cancer
Active, not recruiting
PREWELL Digital Well-being Promotion Intervention With the BitHabit App
General Mental Health and Well-Being, Mental Disorders
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Comparison of Two Timings of Levothyroxine Intake in Hypothyroid Patients: A Cross-over Randomized Control Trial
Hypothyroidism Primary
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Benjamin C Blatt, MD study director
George Washington University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Perspective taking instruction in people with Patient Satisfaction, run by George Washington University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Mar 2009. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
standardized patient satisfaction. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 Mar 2009.