A Korean survey on qualities and definition of a good psychiatrist

Depression among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees and its associated factors regarding work, social support, and loneliness

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to survey the prevalence of depression and its associated factors among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees (physicians in psychiatric residency training).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed Thai psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees from January to February 2023 using an online questionnaire. The questionnaires consisted of (1) the demographic and work-related information; (2) perceptions towards social support and work; (3) the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) Thai version; and (4) the 6-item Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale Thai version. All data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the associated factors concerning depression were analyzed via multiple linear regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 225 total participants, 52(23.1%) and 173 (76.9%) were psychiatry trainees and psychiatrists, respectively. Most of them were female (64.9%) with overall median age (interquatile) was 34 (30, 42) years. Regarding the PHQ-9 findings, the prevalence of depression among all participants was 12.4% (psychiatrists 13.9% and psychiatry trainees 7.7%). From regression analyses, depression was associated with loneliness and perceived levels of work satisfaction and work stress in psychiatrists, while in psychiatry trainees, depression was associated with loneliness and perceived level of ability to control work schedule.

CONCLUSIONS

One-tenth of psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees had depression. Although the prevalence of depression in this study was not extremely high, key contributing factors related to depression, such as loneliness, work satisfaction, work stress, and ability to control the work schedule should be required to action to reduce the depression rate among mental health personnel.

What makes a 'good doctor'? A critical discourse analysis of perspectives from medical students with lived experience as patients

What constitutes a 'good doctor' varies widely across groups and contexts. While patients prioritise communication and empathy, physicians emphasise medical expertise, and medical students describe a combination of the two as professional ideals. We explored the conceptions of the 'good doctor' held by medical learners with chronic illnesses or disabilities who self-identify as patients to understand how their learning as both patients and future physicians aligns with existing medical school curricula. We conducted 10 semistructured interviews with medical students with self-reported chronic illness or disability and who self-identified as patients. We used critical discourse analysis to code for dimensions of the 'good doctor'. In turn, using concepts of Bakhtinian intersubjectivity and the hidden curriculum we explored how these discourses related to student experiences with formal and informal curricular content.According to participants, dimensions of the 'good doctor' included empathy, communication, attention to illness impact and boundary-setting to separate self from patients. Students reported that formal teaching on empathy and illness impact were present in the formal curriculum, however ultimately devalued through day-to-day interactions with faculty and peers. Importantly, teaching on boundary-setting was absent from the formal curriculum, however participants independently developed reflective practices to cultivate these skills. Moreover, we identified two operating discourses of the 'good doctor': an institutionalised discourse of the 'able doctor' and a counterdiscourse of the 'doctor with lived experience' which created a space for reframing experiences with illness and disability as a source of expertise rather than a source of stigma. Perspectives on the 'good doctor' carry important implications for how we define professional roles, and hold profound consequences for medical school admissions, curricular teaching and licensure. Medical students with lived experiences of illness and disability offer critical insights about curricular messages of the 'good doctor' based on their experiences as patients, providing important considerations for curriculum and faculty development.

Depression, anxiety, and burnout among psychiatrists during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Beijing, China

BACKGROUND

With the rise of reported mental disorders and behavioral issues after the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, psychiatrists and mental health care are urgently needed more than ever before. The psychiatric career carries a high emotional burden and stressful demands, which bring issues on psychiatrists' mental health and well-being into question. To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of depression, anxiety, and work burnout among psychiatrists in Beijing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was conducted from January 6 to January 30, 2022, two years after COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic. Recruitment was performed using a convenience sample approach by sending online questionnaires to psychiatrists in Beijing. The symptoms of depression, anxiety, and burnout were evaluated using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS). The perceived stress and social support were measured by the Chinese Perceived Stress Scale (CPSS) and Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), respectively.

RESULTS

The data of 564 psychiatrists (median [interquartile range] age, 37 [30-43] years old) of all 1532 in Beijing were included in the statistical analysis. The prevalence of symptoms of depression, anxiety and burnout were 33.2% (95% CI, 29.3-37.1%, PHQ-9 ≥ 5), 25.4% (95% CI, 21.8-29.0%, GAD-7 ≥ 5) and 40.6% (95% CI, 36.5-44.7%, MBI-GS ≥ 3 in each of the three subdimensions), respectively. The psychiatrist with a higher score on perceived stress was more likely to suffer from depressive symptoms (adjusted odds ratios [ORs]: 4.431 [95%CI, 2.907-6.752]); the anxiety symptoms (adjusted ORs: 8.280 [95%CI, 5.255-13.049]), and the burnout conditions (adjusted ORs: 9.102 [95%CI, 5.795-14.298]). Receiving high social support was an independent protective factor against symptoms of depression (adjusted ORs: 0.176 [95%CI, [0.080-0.386]), anxiety (adjusted ORs: 0.265 [95%CI, 0.111-0.630]) and burnout (adjusted ORs: 0.319 [95%CI, 0.148-0.686]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest a considerable proportion of psychiatrists also suffer from depression, anxiety, and burnout. Perceived stress and social support influence depression, anxiety, and burnout. For public health, we must work together to reduce the pressure and increase social support to mitigate mental health risks in psychiatrists.

Characteristics of exceptionally good Doctors-A survey of public adults

Background

Systematic reviews have found that doctors can have a substantial effect on patients' physical health, beyond what can be explained by known factors. In a previous qualitative study, 13 medical doctors were interviewed on their experiences of exceptionally good doctors, and all had met at least one such doctor.

Objective

To determine how common it is for exceptionally good doctors to be encountered by patients and what are the characteristics of exceptionally good doctors.

Design

Mixed methods cross-sectional survey of 580 Amazon Mechanical Turk participants. Questions included doctor and participant demographics, and 34 Likert questions on characteristics of exceptionally good and average doctors. Free-text questions allowed participants to describe exceptional doctors, record their experience, and provide survey feedback. Stratified sampling ensured gender parity and 33% of participants aged ≥55 years. Analysis included descriptive statistics, statistical modelling of associations between Likert scale scores and patient demographics, and factor analysis.

Results

Of 580 responses, 505 (86%) were included in the analysis. Factor analysis confirmed internal validity. Most respondents (86%) had met at least two exceptionally good doctors, of whom 55% were specialists. 58% of respondents regarded doctors as exceptional based on an overall impression with multiple reasons. Doctors were most commonly considered exceptional based on one or more of their personality, diagnostic, or intervention ability. Respondents who reported the doctors "willingly listened to them to the end" scored their doctors higher on 33 of 34 Likert questions, except for popularity. They also rated average doctors lower throughout.

Conclusions

Exceptionally good doctors appear to be commonly encountered by the adult public. Listening to patients willingly to the end is a highly rated and influential characteristic, suggesting that listening could be targeted for quality improvement.

Patient Perspective in Saudi Arabia: What Qualities Make a Good and Competent Psychiatrist?

Introduction The good qualities of a psychiatrist can vary when asking a psychiatrist, a resident, a student, or even a patient. The patient's perspective, however, is of utmost importance and can be extremely unique. Our study aims to visualize and analyze the perspective of outpatients of the psychiatric department at King Fahad Hospital University on what qualities make a good and competent psychiatrist. As psychiatric medicine depends a lot on the psychological aspect, it yields high importance on studying how patients perceive and see their doctors in different regions of the world. For this reason, we conducted our study in Al-Khobar, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Materials and methods A self-structured questionnaire named "What Qualities Make a Good and Competent Psychiatrist?" was developed and used to achieve the study objectives. It encompasses six sections: patients' personal data and demographics, patients' medical data, psychiatrists' personal traits, knowledge domain, social domain, and clinical setting domain. Results After data collection and analysis, our results showed the following. Patients did not have a generalized preference for personal traits or demographics; however, they preferred Saudi and Arabic-speaking physicians among others. Patients preferred their psychiatrists to be up to date with current research. The score per item is the lowest in the clinical domain, indicating that for the respondents, the clinical domain is the most important trait of a psychiatrist. Of the patients, 66.8% reported that appropriate grooming and clothing were crucial for a psychiatrist. Empathy and proper communication were also very important from the patients' points of view. Social and knowledge domains are also of extreme importance in our region. Discussion In our study, there seems to be no preference toward a psychiatrist's demographic traits with the exception of a Saudi nationality and being an Arabic speaker. The traits explored in this study are categorized into three domains: clinical setting domain, knowledge domain, and social domain. Of the three domains mentioned, the clinical setting domain was deemed the most important, followed by the social and knowledge domains. In a study conducted in Singapore, the social characteristics of the psychiatrist, which represented care and sympathy, were the main concern of patients. A study conducted in the UK showed that the participants were less concerned with the organizational social aspects of the medical processes than the clinical management components. Although the overall requirement for a knowledgeable, skilled, and socially competent psychiatrist and a proper clinical setting is sought by most psychiatric patients in different cultures and countries, there are also significant differences in the priorities of such characteristics. This emphasizes how every region has its standards for this occupation. Conclusion The results of this study suggest a variety of patients' and guardians' perspectives in different cultures with the clinical setting being an integral part of the psychiatrist's practice in Al-Khobar, KSA. The results showed that the clinical setting domain was the most critical domain, followed by social and knowledge domains. To improve patient experience and satisfaction, certain actions should be taken into consideration in our region.

Characteristics of Exceptionally Good Doctors: A Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Survey of Adults

Background

Doctors constitute a significant proportion of a very large number of medical interactions. They are known to vary in the quality of their work, with some having an exceptionally beneficial effect on patients’ physical health. In a qualitative study, we interviewed medical doctors on their opinions and experiences of exceptionally good doctors. Their responses and the results from previous research are used as a basis for this proposed cross-sectional survey directed to members of the public on their encounters with exceptionally good doctors. The primary aim of this cross-sectional study is to describe the characteristics of exceptional doctors as reported by a large representative sample of adult patients.

Methods and Analysis

A mixed qualitative and quantitative anonymous cross-sectional survey of 500 Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) respondents, who have met one or more exceptionally good doctors in their life, will be conducted. Information requested will include reasons for nominating a particular doctor; experience of how that doctor differs from other and average doctors; and 34 5-point Likert scale questions on the characteristics of that doctor and the same Likert questions for the average doctor. An opportunity to report their experience in free-text form will be provided. Sample size will be sufficient to obtain a margin of error of 4%. The authors will provide descriptive statistics, including graphs of the Likert scale question responses; conduct factor analysis for internal validity; investigate satisficing and logical inconsistencies; and explore whether there are multiple types of exceptionally good doctors.

Discussion

Previous surveys of patients’ perceptions of doctors exist though none have focused on exceptionally good doctors. The expected results will include a list of characteristics that are important to patients in determining exceptionally good doctors.

Protocol for a Qualitative Study on Doctors' Opinions on and Experiences of Exceptionally Good Doctors

OBJECTIVE

Doctors have a varying effect on patients' physical health. This means that there are doctors that are more effective than others. Even though the doctor is a part of very many medical interactions, it is not known in which way exceptionally good doctors differ from their peers. After authoring two systematic and one methodological review on identifying exceptional doctors, the authors in this qualitative interview-based study take a bottom-up, inductive approach to answer the question of what makes an exceptionally good doctor.

METHODS

About 10-15 semi-structured interviews of medical doctors of any specialty who speak English will be conducted. Recruitment will be through the authors' network and their referrals. Questions will be whether they have an opinion on what makes an exceptionally good doctor, whether they have met such a person and how did this doctor differ from other doctors. The interviews will be done by a 62-year old PhD student who is not a clinician but has extensive experience in having personal conversations as a financial adviser. This could be helpful as the interviewer is only aware that there are exceptionally good doctors but has no notion how exceptionally good doctors differ from their colleagues.

ANALYSIS

A six-phase thematic analysis in an experiential framework as per Braun and Clarke will be implemented with the aim to find out what the doctors think and have experienced. This is an inductive approach using a realist epistemological position under the assumption that it is possible to acquire truthful knowledge on what makes exceptionally good doctors.

DISCUSSION

Previous qualitative research on exceptionally good doctors consisted of interviewing author-selected exceptionally good doctors. This study takes a step back from this approach by asking the peers of exceptionally good doctors how they define being exceptionally good and how they experience such doctors.

What is a good doctor?

Changes in medical curricula have led to a shift of focus in medical education. The goal was to implement a more practical approach to teaching and thereby create better doctors. However, the question of what makes a good doctor is not easy to answer. This article gives an overview on the literature about this topic. A systematized review and narrative synthesis were conducted including 20 articles about the features of good doctors. Qualitative and quantitative studies as well as questionnaires were included. These studies reported research involving students, doctors, patients, and nurses. The resulting characteristics of good doctors fell into six categories: (1) General interpersonal qualities, (2) Communication and patient involvement, (3) Medical competence, (4) Ethics, (5) Medical management, (6) Teaching, research, and continuous education. The different stakeholders showed different ideas of the concept of a good doctor. Interestingly, patients had a stronger focus on communication skills, whereas doctors put more emphasis on medical skills. Balancing this discrepancy will be a challenge for future medical education.