Skip to main content
. 2003 May;18(5):364–369. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20747.x

Table 1.

Characteristics of Study Population

Characteristic Year 1 Year 2 Seminar Year 2 Seminar/Letter Significance
N 376 227 210
Mean age, y 65 65 65 NS
Female, % 48 52.2 50.7 NS
Median y followed in clinic 4 4 4 NS
Told by MD of change, % 70.5 77.8 78.4 .01
Told name of new doctor, % 76 75.8 99.5 *
Want another visit to discuss MD's departure, % 24.2 18.0 15.1 .01
Want another visit to follow up on tests, % 42.5 25.1 23.1 <.0001
Feel MD could have done more to ease change, % 18.2 15.5 9.4 .005
Expressed feelings to MD, % 69.3 60.8 59.2 <.05
MD discussed feelings, % 53.0 58.8 57.2 NS
Felt better after discussion, % 91.0 91.3 96.0 NS
Opinion of institution, mean 4.4 4.5 4.5 NS
Satisfaction with transfer, mean 3.8 4.1 4.5 .0006
 Very satisfied, % 46.8 60.3 72.3 <.0001
 Somewhat satisfied, % 10.4 12.5 11.8
 Neutral, % 25.0 12.5 11.3
 Somewhat dissatisfied, % 11.4 8.5 3.3
 Very dissatisfied, % 6.4 6.2 1.4
*

The difference between patients being told the name of the doctor before and after the seminar alone is not significant. The letter was from the new physician, thus clearly providing patients with the name of their new doctor, although one patient apparently failed to notice this.

Measured on 5-point Likert scale.

NS, not significant.