Skip to main content
. 2019 Sep 17;16(5):698–705. doi: 10.1177/1558944719873395

Table 4.

Bivariate Analysis Missed of Empathic Opportunity (n = 58).

Variables At least one missed empathic opportunity
No
Yes
(n= 18) (n = 40) P value
Age, mean ± SD 50 ± 14 54 ± 17 .49
Gender, number (%) 1.0
 Male 10 (56) 21 (53)
 Female 8 (44) 19 (47)
Race, number (%) 1.0
 White 15 (83) 33 (83)
 Non-white 3 (17) 7 (17)
Insurance status, number (%) .77
 Public 6 (33) 16 (40)
 Private 12 (67) 24 (60)
Working status, number (%) .15
 Working 14 (78) 22 (55)
 Not working 4 (22) 18 (45)
Marital status, number (%) .40
 Unmarried 7 (39) 21 (52)
 Married 11 (61) 19 (48)
Diagnosis, number (%) 1.0
 Nontraumatic 12 (67) 25 (62)
 Traumatic 6 (33) 15 (38)
Surgeon, number (%) .067
 1 12 (67) 13 (32)
 2 4 (22) 18 (45)
 3 2 (11) 9 (23)
Health literacy, number (%) .31
Limited (NVS score ≤ 3) 2 (11) 11 (28)
Adequate (NVS score ≥ 4-6) 16 (89) 29 (73)
Number of patient-initiated clues
 All types of clues 2.2 ± 1.2 3.1 ± 1.9 .074
 Emotional type of clues 1.4 ± 0.78 2.2 ± 1.4 .039
 Social type of clues 0.72 ± 0.83 0.88 ± 1.3 .65
 Visit duration (min), M ± SD 9.8 ± 5.2 12 ± 7.4 .32
PROMIS instruments, M ± SD
 Pain Interference 56 ± 6.6 60 ± 9.8 .14
 Upper Extremity Function 40 ± 11 35 ± 9.5 .053
 Depression 46 ± 7.1 50 ± 9.8 .23

Visits with at least one patient-initiated clue were included. NVS = Newest Vital Sign; PROMIS = Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-based.