Savage & Armstrong 1990: Practitioner Style Impact on Patient Satisfaction in General Practice

What was the aim of the Savage & Armstrong study?

To investigate whether patient satisfaction is increased with a sharing style of consultation compared to a directed style.

How many patients participated in the Savage & Armstrong study?

200 patients aged between 16-75.

What sampling method was used in the study?

Random sampling.

What were the two independent variables in the study?

IV1: A directed style of consultation; IV2: A sharing style of consultation.

What method was used to collect data in the Savage & Armstrong study?

Questionnaires rating the doctor's style on 5 criteria.

What significant difference was found regarding patient explanations between styles?

More patients in the directed style agreed they received an excellent explanation compared to the sharing style (45% vs 24%).

What was a key conclusion from the Savage & Armstrong study?

Directed styles led to greater patient satisfaction regarding the doctor's understanding of patients' problems and quality of explanation.

What did the study suggest about patient preferences in consultations?

Patients prefer certainty and paternalism, viewing the doctor as an authority figure.

What ethical consideration was addressed in the Savage & Armstrong study?

Patients gave consent for their appointments to be audio recorded.

What was a strength of the sampling method used in the study?

Participants selected by random sampling are representative of patients registered to the doctor.

What was a weakness regarding the generalizability of the study's findings?

11% of patients did not complete the first questionnaire and 44% did not complete the second.

What issue does the study highlight regarding individual differences?

It ignores individual differences that could impact which consultation style is preferred by patients.

What is the significance of the determinism vs free will debate in the context of the study?

Patients do not have free will over their diagnosis but can choose how to cope with it, impacting their ability to manage their illness.

How does Savage & Armstrong's research relate to individual and situational explanations?

It offers situational explanations for patient satisfaction but overlooks individual differences that may affect preferences.

What was the method of consultation in the study?

Patients entered the room, and the practitioner turned over a card indicating the consultation style before proceeding.

What was recorded during the consultations?

Length of consultation, demographics, and other information were recorded on a computer.

What was the follow-up method for patient feedback?

A second questionnaire was sent to patients in a stamped addressed envelope to return one week later.

What was a notable finding regarding patients who rarely attended the surgery?

They showed a significantly better perception of the doctor's explanation and understanding of their problem on the follow-up questionnaire.

What does the study suggest about the effectiveness of directed styles for chronic illnesses?

The directed style does not provide greater satisfaction during longer consultations where advice is the main treatment.

What practical application does the study suggest for doctors?

Doctors can adjust their behavior in consultations to help patients feel more confident in their diagnosis and treatment.