Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Feb;86(2):ajpe8642.
doi: 10.5688/ajpe8642. Epub 2021 Jul 22.

An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study of Standardized Patient Comments on Empathy and Student Communication Scores

Logan T Murry  1 , Jeffrey C Reist  2 , Michelle A Fravel  2 , Laura E Knockel  2 , Mathew J Witry  2
Affiliations

An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study of Standardized Patient Comments on Empathy and Student Communication Scores

Logan T Murry et al. Am J Pharm Educ. 2022 Feb.

Abstract

Objective. To quantify student pharmacists' communication ability based on scores from standardized patient (SP) communication rubrics, describe and categorize SP comments about student empathy, and test the relationship between students' communication scores and empathy.Methods. A concurrent mixed methods research design was used to assess a graded performance-based assessment (PBA) of student pharmacists that had been conducted at one college of pharmacy. The PBA rubrics (n=218) completed by SPs contained 20 assessment items and space for open-ended feedback. Scoring categories for communication assessment included: yes, inconsistent, no, and not applicable (N/A). Descriptive statistics were calculated for rubric scores. Feedback from standardized patients was analyzed and used to categorize student interactions during the encounter as reflecting high empathy, mixed empathy, or low empathy. Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA was used to test the relationship between empathy category and communication score.Results. Standardized patients had written comments on 141 of the 218 rubrics (64.7%). The mean communication score was 39.0±1.6 (range, 31-40) out of a maximum 40 points. The total scores for the low, mixed, and high empathy category transformations were 6 (4.3%), 95 (67.4%), and 40 (28.4%), respectively. The results of the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA were significant, suggesting that communication scores were different between empathy categories.Conclusion. There was a positive association between students' scores on communication rubrics and student empathy categorization, with student pharmacists exhibiting different levels of clinical empathy. While the PBA of interest was not specifically focused on empathy, SPs frequently provided feedback about empathy to students, suggesting that showing empathy during the encounter was important.

Keywords: clinical empathy; communication; empathy; performance-based assessments; standardized patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Mixed Methods Study Design
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Jubraj B, Barnett NL, Grimes L, Varia S, Chater A, Auyeung V. Why we should understand the patient experience: clinical empathy and medicines optimisation. Int J Pharm Pract. 2016;24(5):367-370. doi:10.1111/ijpp.12268 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tamayo CA, Rizkalla MN, Henderson KK. Cognitive, Behavioral and Emotional Empathy in Pharmacy Students: Targeting Programs for Curriculum Modification. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2016-April-19 2016;7(96) doi:10.3389/fphar.2016.00096 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reed BN, Haines ST, Holmes ER. Can Empathy Be Learned? An Exploratory Analysis at Two Schools of Pharmacy. Am J Pharm Educ. 2020:ajpe8083. doi:10.5688/ajpe8083 - DOI
    1. Meyer-Junco L. Empathy and the new practitioner. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2015;72(23):2042-2058. - PubMed
    1. Fjortoft N, Van Winkle LJ, Hojat M. Measuring empathy in pharmacy students. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011;75(6):109-109. doi:10.5688/ajpe756109 - DOI - PMC - PubMed