General Perception of Doctor–Patient Relationship From Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

The doctor–patient relationship (DPR) is essential in the process of medical consultations and treatments. Poor DPR may lead to poor medical outcomes, medical violence against doctors, and a negative perception of the healthcare system. Little is known about how DPR is affected during this novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the DPR during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were 1,903 participants in China (95% response rate) who were recruited during the pandemic online via convenience and snowball sampling. Several questionnaires were used to evaluate participants' attitudes toward DPR, including the Patient–Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9), Chinese Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale (C-WFPTS), a survey on medical violence against doctors, factors that affect and improve DPR, and general trust in medical services. Results revealed that DPR improved, and doctor–patient trust increased compared to participants' retrospective attitude before the pandemic. In addition, patients' violence against doctors decreased during the pandemic. Better doctor–patient trust and lower violence toward doctors are related to better DPR. Furthermore, we found that the main factors that could improve DPR include communication between doctors and patients, medical technology and services, and medical knowledge for patients. This study helped to better understand DPR in China, which may contribute to future health policies and medical practices in order to improve DPR and doctor–patient trust.

Analysis of Doctor–Patient Relationship in Post-COVID-19 Period: Perspective Differences Between Citizen and Medical Staff

“…The outbreak of COVID-19 has contributed to better doctor–patient trust and lower violence toward doctors. 15 Based on the medical staff’s contributions in COVID-19 period, the view that medical staff’s job task is enormous and risky was recognized by 41.3% citizens, generally. Overall, 38.8% citizens believed that positive media reports about medical staff can improve their occupational image.…”

The Effects of Physicians’ Communication and Empathy Ability on Physician–Patient Relationship from Physicians’ and Patients’ Perspectives

“…First, this study was investigated before the COVID-19 pandemic and has not yet investigated the feelings of the physicians and patients about physician empathy, physician communication, and physician-patient relationship after the COVID-19 pandemic. The world experienced the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and China successfully fought it and in the process of fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, Chinese physicians fought bravely and established a very positive image in the minds of patients and the general public (Zhou et al, 2021), which may cause patients to re-evaluate physicians and their competence. Therefore, future research needs to examine the changes in the physician-patient relationship in China after the COVID-19 pandemic and thus compare physician empathy, physician communication, and physician-patient relationship before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.…”

Doctor-patient relationship improved during COVID-19 pandemic, but weakness remains

“…Second, the measurement of DPR before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were evaluated with the same questionnaire and was based on patients’ self-reports, which may lead to a recall bias. Third, the data disclosed in a previous article might induce over representatives [ 34 ]. Four, due to the cultural circle and the specificity of the social relationship between doctors and patients in China, the results of this study cannot be extrapolated to other parts of the world.…”

“…To ensure the quality of data, we conducted quality control for our sample in addition to our inclusion and exclusion criteria to further flag and exclude untrustworthy responses. A detailed description of the data Quality Control has been presented previously [ 34 ]. After scrutinizing the initial data( N = 2000), we excluded 97 responses (52 were eliminated because of uncompleted data, another 35 were excluded because their responses couldn’t be logically verified by the platform, and 10 were excluded as their completion time was shorter than the required minimum time of 3 min), and finally, 1903 data were included for the final analysis.…”