Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?

Adeline M. Deladisma, Marc Cohen, Amy Stevens, Peggy Wagner, Benjamin Lok, Thomas Bernard, Christopher Oxendine, Lori Schumacher, Kyle Johnsen, Robert Dickerson, Andrew Raij, Rebecca Wells, Margaret Duerson, J. Garrett Harper, D. Scott Lind

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

69 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Significant information exchange occurs between a doctor and patient through nonverbal communication such as gestures, body position, and eye gaze. In addition, empathy is an important trust-building element in a physician: patient relationship. Previous work validates the use of virtual patients (VP) to teach and assess content items related to history-taking and basic communication skills. The purpose of this study was to determine whether more complex communication skills, such as nonverbal behaviors and empathy, were similar when students interacted with a VP or standardized patient (SP). Methods: Medical students (n = 84) at the University of Florida (UF) and the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) underwent a videotaped interview with either a SP or a highly interactive VP with abdominal pain. In the scenario, a life-sized VP was projected on the wall of an exam room in SP teaching and testing centers at both institutions. VP and SP scripted responses to student questions were identical. To prompt an empathetic response (ie, acknowledging the patients' feelings), during the interview the VP or SP stated "I am scared; can you help me?" Clinicians (n = 4) rated student videotapes with respect to nonverbal communication skills and empathetic behaviors using a Likert-type scale with anchored descriptors. Results: Clinicians rated students interacting with SPs higher with respect to the nonverbal communication skills such as head nod (2.78 ± .79 vs 1.94 ± .44, P < .05), and body lean (2.97 ± .94 vs 1.93 ± .58, P < .05), level of immersion in the scenario (3.31 ± .49 vs 2.26 ± .52, P < .05), anxiety (1.16 ± .31 vs 1.45 ± .33, P < .05), attitude toward the patient (3.24 ± .43 vs 2.89 ± .36, P < .05), and asking clearer questions (3.06 ± .32 vs 2.51 ± .32, P < .05) compared to the VP group. The students in the SP group also had a higher empathy rating (2.75 ± .86 vs 2.16 ± .83, P < .05) and better overall rating (4.29 ± 1.32 vs 3.24 ± 1.06, P < .05) than the VP group. Empathy was positively correlated with the observed nonverbal communication behaviors. Eye contact was the most strongly correlated with empathy (r = .57, P < .001), followed by head nod (r = .55, P < .001) and body lean (r = .49, P < .001). Conclusions: Medical students demonstrate nonverbal communication behaviors and respond empathetically to a VP, although the quantity and quality of these behaviors were less than those exhibited in a similar SP scenario. Student empathy in response to the VP was less genuine and not as sincere as compared to the SP scenario. While we will never duplicate a real physician/patient interaction, virtual clinical scenarios could augment existing SP programs by providing a controllable, secure, and safe learning environment with the opportunity for repetitive practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)756-760
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume193
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2007

Fingerprint

Medical Students
Nonverbal Communication
Students
Communication
Head
Interviews
Physician-Patient Relations
Gestures
Videotape Recording

Keywords

  • Communication skills
  • Empathy
  • Virtual patients
  • Virtual reality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Deladisma, A. M., Cohen, M., Stevens, A., Wagner, P., Lok, B., Bernard, T., ... Lind, D. S. (2007). Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient? American Journal of Surgery, 193(6), 756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021

Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient? / Deladisma, Adeline M.; Cohen, Marc; Stevens, Amy; Wagner, Peggy; Lok, Benjamin; Bernard, Thomas; Oxendine, Christopher; Schumacher, Lori; Johnsen, Kyle; Dickerson, Robert; Raij, Andrew; Wells, Rebecca; Duerson, Margaret; Harper, J. Garrett; Lind, D. Scott.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 193, No. 6, 01.06.2007, p. 756-760.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Deladisma, AM, Cohen, M, Stevens, A, Wagner, P, Lok, B, Bernard, T, Oxendine, C, Schumacher, L, Johnsen, K, Dickerson, R, Raij, A, Wells, R, Duerson, M, Harper, JG & Lind, DS 2007, 'Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?', American Journal of Surgery, vol. 193, no. 6, pp. 756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021
Deladisma AM, Cohen M, Stevens A, Wagner P, Lok B, Bernard T et al. Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient? American Journal of Surgery. 2007 Jun 1;193(6):756-760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021
Deladisma, Adeline M. ; Cohen, Marc ; Stevens, Amy ; Wagner, Peggy ; Lok, Benjamin ; Bernard, Thomas ; Oxendine, Christopher ; Schumacher, Lori ; Johnsen, Kyle ; Dickerson, Robert ; Raij, Andrew ; Wells, Rebecca ; Duerson, Margaret ; Harper, J. Garrett ; Lind, D. Scott. / Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2007 ; Vol. 193, No. 6. pp. 756-760.
@article{e9f2f05295d34023b5b7cef005dd4516,
title = "Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?",
abstract = "Background: Significant information exchange occurs between a doctor and patient through nonverbal communication such as gestures, body position, and eye gaze. In addition, empathy is an important trust-building element in a physician: patient relationship. Previous work validates the use of virtual patients (VP) to teach and assess content items related to history-taking and basic communication skills. The purpose of this study was to determine whether more complex communication skills, such as nonverbal behaviors and empathy, were similar when students interacted with a VP or standardized patient (SP). Methods: Medical students (n = 84) at the University of Florida (UF) and the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) underwent a videotaped interview with either a SP or a highly interactive VP with abdominal pain. In the scenario, a life-sized VP was projected on the wall of an exam room in SP teaching and testing centers at both institutions. VP and SP scripted responses to student questions were identical. To prompt an empathetic response (ie, acknowledging the patients' feelings), during the interview the VP or SP stated {"}I am scared; can you help me?{"} Clinicians (n = 4) rated student videotapes with respect to nonverbal communication skills and empathetic behaviors using a Likert-type scale with anchored descriptors. Results: Clinicians rated students interacting with SPs higher with respect to the nonverbal communication skills such as head nod (2.78 ± .79 vs 1.94 ± .44, P < .05), and body lean (2.97 ± .94 vs 1.93 ± .58, P < .05), level of immersion in the scenario (3.31 ± .49 vs 2.26 ± .52, P < .05), anxiety (1.16 ± .31 vs 1.45 ± .33, P < .05), attitude toward the patient (3.24 ± .43 vs 2.89 ± .36, P < .05), and asking clearer questions (3.06 ± .32 vs 2.51 ± .32, P < .05) compared to the VP group. The students in the SP group also had a higher empathy rating (2.75 ± .86 vs 2.16 ± .83, P < .05) and better overall rating (4.29 ± 1.32 vs 3.24 ± 1.06, P < .05) than the VP group. Empathy was positively correlated with the observed nonverbal communication behaviors. Eye contact was the most strongly correlated with empathy (r = .57, P < .001), followed by head nod (r = .55, P < .001) and body lean (r = .49, P < .001). Conclusions: Medical students demonstrate nonverbal communication behaviors and respond empathetically to a VP, although the quantity and quality of these behaviors were less than those exhibited in a similar SP scenario. Student empathy in response to the VP was less genuine and not as sincere as compared to the SP scenario. While we will never duplicate a real physician/patient interaction, virtual clinical scenarios could augment existing SP programs by providing a controllable, secure, and safe learning environment with the opportunity for repetitive practice.",
keywords = "Communication skills, Empathy, Virtual patients, Virtual reality",
author = "Deladisma, {Adeline M.} and Marc Cohen and Amy Stevens and Peggy Wagner and Benjamin Lok and Thomas Bernard and Christopher Oxendine and Lori Schumacher and Kyle Johnsen and Robert Dickerson and Andrew Raij and Rebecca Wells and Margaret Duerson and Harper, {J. Garrett} and Lind, {D. Scott}",
year = "2007",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "193",
pages = "756--760",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?

AU - Deladisma, Adeline M.

AU - Cohen, Marc

AU - Stevens, Amy

AU - Wagner, Peggy

AU - Lok, Benjamin

AU - Bernard, Thomas

AU - Oxendine, Christopher

AU - Schumacher, Lori

AU - Johnsen, Kyle

AU - Dickerson, Robert

AU - Raij, Andrew

AU - Wells, Rebecca

AU - Duerson, Margaret

AU - Harper, J. Garrett

AU - Lind, D. Scott

PY - 2007/6/1

Y1 - 2007/6/1

N2 - Background: Significant information exchange occurs between a doctor and patient through nonverbal communication such as gestures, body position, and eye gaze. In addition, empathy is an important trust-building element in a physician: patient relationship. Previous work validates the use of virtual patients (VP) to teach and assess content items related to history-taking and basic communication skills. The purpose of this study was to determine whether more complex communication skills, such as nonverbal behaviors and empathy, were similar when students interacted with a VP or standardized patient (SP). Methods: Medical students (n = 84) at the University of Florida (UF) and the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) underwent a videotaped interview with either a SP or a highly interactive VP with abdominal pain. In the scenario, a life-sized VP was projected on the wall of an exam room in SP teaching and testing centers at both institutions. VP and SP scripted responses to student questions were identical. To prompt an empathetic response (ie, acknowledging the patients' feelings), during the interview the VP or SP stated "I am scared; can you help me?" Clinicians (n = 4) rated student videotapes with respect to nonverbal communication skills and empathetic behaviors using a Likert-type scale with anchored descriptors. Results: Clinicians rated students interacting with SPs higher with respect to the nonverbal communication skills such as head nod (2.78 ± .79 vs 1.94 ± .44, P < .05), and body lean (2.97 ± .94 vs 1.93 ± .58, P < .05), level of immersion in the scenario (3.31 ± .49 vs 2.26 ± .52, P < .05), anxiety (1.16 ± .31 vs 1.45 ± .33, P < .05), attitude toward the patient (3.24 ± .43 vs 2.89 ± .36, P < .05), and asking clearer questions (3.06 ± .32 vs 2.51 ± .32, P < .05) compared to the VP group. The students in the SP group also had a higher empathy rating (2.75 ± .86 vs 2.16 ± .83, P < .05) and better overall rating (4.29 ± 1.32 vs 3.24 ± 1.06, P < .05) than the VP group. Empathy was positively correlated with the observed nonverbal communication behaviors. Eye contact was the most strongly correlated with empathy (r = .57, P < .001), followed by head nod (r = .55, P < .001) and body lean (r = .49, P < .001). Conclusions: Medical students demonstrate nonverbal communication behaviors and respond empathetically to a VP, although the quantity and quality of these behaviors were less than those exhibited in a similar SP scenario. Student empathy in response to the VP was less genuine and not as sincere as compared to the SP scenario. While we will never duplicate a real physician/patient interaction, virtual clinical scenarios could augment existing SP programs by providing a controllable, secure, and safe learning environment with the opportunity for repetitive practice.

AB - Background: Significant information exchange occurs between a doctor and patient through nonverbal communication such as gestures, body position, and eye gaze. In addition, empathy is an important trust-building element in a physician: patient relationship. Previous work validates the use of virtual patients (VP) to teach and assess content items related to history-taking and basic communication skills. The purpose of this study was to determine whether more complex communication skills, such as nonverbal behaviors and empathy, were similar when students interacted with a VP or standardized patient (SP). Methods: Medical students (n = 84) at the University of Florida (UF) and the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) underwent a videotaped interview with either a SP or a highly interactive VP with abdominal pain. In the scenario, a life-sized VP was projected on the wall of an exam room in SP teaching and testing centers at both institutions. VP and SP scripted responses to student questions were identical. To prompt an empathetic response (ie, acknowledging the patients' feelings), during the interview the VP or SP stated "I am scared; can you help me?" Clinicians (n = 4) rated student videotapes with respect to nonverbal communication skills and empathetic behaviors using a Likert-type scale with anchored descriptors. Results: Clinicians rated students interacting with SPs higher with respect to the nonverbal communication skills such as head nod (2.78 ± .79 vs 1.94 ± .44, P < .05), and body lean (2.97 ± .94 vs 1.93 ± .58, P < .05), level of immersion in the scenario (3.31 ± .49 vs 2.26 ± .52, P < .05), anxiety (1.16 ± .31 vs 1.45 ± .33, P < .05), attitude toward the patient (3.24 ± .43 vs 2.89 ± .36, P < .05), and asking clearer questions (3.06 ± .32 vs 2.51 ± .32, P < .05) compared to the VP group. The students in the SP group also had a higher empathy rating (2.75 ± .86 vs 2.16 ± .83, P < .05) and better overall rating (4.29 ± 1.32 vs 3.24 ± 1.06, P < .05) than the VP group. Empathy was positively correlated with the observed nonverbal communication behaviors. Eye contact was the most strongly correlated with empathy (r = .57, P < .001), followed by head nod (r = .55, P < .001) and body lean (r = .49, P < .001). Conclusions: Medical students demonstrate nonverbal communication behaviors and respond empathetically to a VP, although the quantity and quality of these behaviors were less than those exhibited in a similar SP scenario. Student empathy in response to the VP was less genuine and not as sincere as compared to the SP scenario. While we will never duplicate a real physician/patient interaction, virtual clinical scenarios could augment existing SP programs by providing a controllable, secure, and safe learning environment with the opportunity for repetitive practice.

KW - Communication skills

KW - Empathy

KW - Virtual patients

KW - Virtual reality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248336128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34248336128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021

M3 - Article

C2 - 17512291

AN - SCOPUS:34248336128

VL - 193

SP - 756

EP - 760

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 6

ER -