Table 4.
Positive encounters (n=25; 13 physicians, 12 nurses)† | ||
---|---|---|
Beneficial effects | 20 (80%) | |
Provided best possible care | 20 (80%) | |
More focused/engaged during patient care | ‘More cognizant of medical complexities surrounding patient, as well as psychosocial issues.’ (11, physician) | 8 (32%) |
Provided extra testing, consultation or treatment | ‘In that the patient was a very kind, articulate person I may have been more motivated to go the extra mile to make the correct diagnosis.’ (12, physician) | 7 (28%) |
‘I feel like I could do more to help the patient instead of [the] minimum required.’ (141, nurse) | ||
Advocated for patient | ‘I think my gut feeling about the case allowed me to advocate harder for the patient and I am glad it did.’ (134, nurse) | 4 (16%) |
Positively impacted patient’s mood | ‘My emotions helped calm the patient…’ (23, physician) | 3 (12%) |
Spent more time with patient | ‘I’m not certain that the patient having a positive influence on me would have altered my clinical decision making, however, it made me more likely to respond to her positively. Since she was so pleasant and appreciative of everything I did for her I was happy to enter the room to help her.’ (119, nurse) | 3 (12%) |
Expedited patient care | ‘I liked the patient and tried to expedite his care since he had been so patient.’ (25, physician) | 2 (8%) |
Miscellaneous (does not fit in any categories) | 5 (20%) |
Codes are not mutually exclusive; 28% of the responses were coded into two or more categories. Percentages that are highlighted reflect the percentage of participants whose responses were coded in at least one category within the highlighted theme or subtheme. Percentages that appear below these reflect the percentage of participants whose responses were coded for that specific category.
Three participants responded that their emotions may have influenced their decision-making but did not include a free-text response.