Table 3.
Self-assessment of each consultation by the physicians (6-point numeric rating scale, 1 (*very good/#very high), 6 (*not at all/#very low))
| Item | Training group (n = 8) mean ± sd/median /n (%) |
Control group (n = 9) mean ± sd/median /n (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Number of consultation | 80 (58.4 %) | 57 (41.6 %) |
| Overall, consultation situation was suitable (How suitable was the consultation situation to address essential matters?) |
79 (98.8 %) | 57 (100.0 %) |
| Empathy (“How well did you succeed in empathizing the patients’ situation and to take this into account during the consultation?)* | 1.7 ± 0.5/2.0 | 1.9 ± 0.7/2.0 |
| Structure (“How well did you succeed in structuring context, content, setting and comprehensiveness of the consultation?)* | 2.1 ± 0.8/2.0 | 1.9 ± 0.8/2.0 |
| Information transfer (“How well did you succeed to impart the information?”)* | 2.1 ± 0.9/2.0 | 2.1 ± 0.7/2.0 |
| Understanding (“How sophisticated was the communication with the patient?”)* | 1.6 ± 0.9/1.0 | 1.6 ± 0.8/1.0 |
| Satisfaction with consultation (“Overall, how satisfied were you with the consultation”) * | 2.0 ± 1.0/2.0 | 2.1 ± 0.8/2.0 |
| Complexity of the consultation (“How complex was the consultation?”)# | 2.6 ± 1.3/2.0 | 2.5 ± 1.0/3.0 |