World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Patients Perception of Dental Students’ Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) in an Academic Dental Institution of Bhubaneswar City, India

Vinay Suresan, Pritam Mohanty, Sourav Sen, Nibedita Sethi, Kajol Priyadarshinee

Keywords : Dental education, Dentist-patient relations, Dental students, Empathy, Patient-centered care

Citation Information : Suresan V, Mohanty P, Sen S, Sethi N, Priyadarshinee K. Patients Perception of Dental Students’ Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) in an Academic Dental Institution of Bhubaneswar City, India. World J Dent 2022; 13 (6):652-657.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2070

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 26-08-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of this current study was to access the patients’ perception of dental students’ Consultation and relational empathy (CARE) in an Academic Dental Institution in Bhubaneswar City, India. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted among the patients attending an academic dental institution. A pretested, validated, and self-structured questionnaire was designed to assess their demographic information (gender, age, education, occupation, and annual income) and the CARE empathy assessment. The study was conducted over a period of 6 months. The Chi-squared test compared the differences between the patient demographics and CARE empathy scores. A linear regression analysis was used to assess the effects of demographic variables on the CARE empathy scores. Results: A total of 1,238 subjects participated in this study. The commonest age group was 28–37 years (n = 379, 30.4%). The male participants reported a higher mean empathy score (22.95 ± 5.1, n = 681, 54.6%) as compared to females. Subjects having college and higher educational qualifications reported higher empathy scores (23.38 ± 4.7, n = 509, 40.8%). Housewives had stated the least (CARE score = 21.91 ± 4.6, n = 416, 33.4%). The highest empathy scores were reported among subjects having an income between 5 and 10 lakh rupees per annum (CARE score = 23.26 ± 5.2, n = 85, 6.8%). The responses of the present study were skewed toward the “Good” and “Fair” categories of the CARE measure. A statistically significant correlation was noted for the education variable (p = 0.002) and the annual income (p = 0.012) variables. Conclusion: The CARE measure questionnaire was proven to be beneficial in recording the empathy scores. Overall reports show that there was fair empathy among the majority of the students as perceived by the patients. Clinical significance: Patient perceived empathy of the treating dentist plays a critical role in the establishment of interpersonal trust and partnership, willingness to share their concerns, and symptoms, encouraged positive behavioral change, and quick patient recovery.

PDF Share
  1. Grace EG, Sarlani E, Balciunas BA. Referring patients for stress-related disorders. Gen Dent 2002;50(6):538–539. PMID: 12572186.
  2. Chu CI, Tseng CC. A survey of how patient-perceived empathy affects the relationship between health literacy and the understanding of information by orthopedic patients? BMC Public Health 2013; 13:(1). DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-155
  3. Schattner A. Who cares for empathy? QJM 2012; 105(3):287–290. DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/hcr215.
  4. Van Rooy DL, Viswesvaran C, Pluta P. An evaluation of construct validity: what is this thing called emotional intelligence? Hum Perform 2005;18(4). DOI: 10.1207/s15327043hup1804_9
  5. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Mangione S, et al. Physician empathy in medical education and practice: experience with the jefferson scale of physician empathy. Semin Integr Med 2003;1(1). DOI: 10.1016/S1543-1150(03)00002-4
  6. Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, et al. Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet 2001;357(9258):757–762. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04169-6
  7. Vermeire E, Hearnshaw H, Van Royen P, et al. Patient adherence to treatment: three decades of research. a comprehensive review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001;26(5):331–342. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2710.2001.00363.x
  8. Kim SS, Kaplowitz S, Johnston MV. The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance. Eval Health Prof 2004;27(3):237–251. DOI: 10.1177/0163278704267037
  9. Thomas MR, Dyrbye LN, Huntington JL, et al. How do distress and well-being relate to medical student empathy? A multicenter study. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22(2):177–183. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-006-0039-6
  10. Griffin SJ, Kinmonth AL, Veltman MW, et al. Effect on health-related outcomes of interventions to alter the interaction between patients and practitioners: a systematic review of trials. Ann Fam Med 2004;2(6):595–608. DOI: 10.1370/afm.142
  11. Berge ME, Berg E, Ingebrigtsen J. A critical appraisal of holistic teaching and its effects on dental student learning at University of Bergen, Norway. J Dent Educ 2013;77(5):612–620.
  12. Dalaya M, Ishaquddin S, Ghadage M, et al. An interesting review on soft skills and dental practice. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9(3):ZE19–ZE21. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/12725.5719
  13. Gonzalez MA, Abu Kasim NH, Naimie Z. Soft skills and dental education. Eur J Dent Educ 2013;17(2):73–82. DOI: 10.1111/eje.12017
  14. Sherman JJ, Cramer A. Measurement of changes in empathy during dental school. J Dent Educ 2005; 69(3):338–345.
  15. Neumann M, Edelhäuser F, Tauschel D, et al. Empathy decline and its reasons: a systematic review of studies with medical students and residents. Acad Med 2011;86(8):996–1009. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318221e615
  16. Tavakol S, Dennick R, Tavakol M. Medical students’ understanding of empathy: a phenomenological study. Med Educ 2012;46(3):306–316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04152.x
  17. Park SE, Howell TH. Implementation of a patient-centred approach to clinical dental education: a five-year reflection. J Dent Educ 2015;79(5):523–529.
  18. ADEA competencies for the new general dentist. J Dent Educ 2017;81(7):844–847. DOI: 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2017.81.7.tb06299.x
  19. Hojat M, Mangione S, Nasca TJ, et al. The jefferson scale of physician empathy: development and preliminary psychometric data. Educ Psychol Meas 2001;61(2):349–365. DOI: 10.1177/00131640121971158
  20. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;44(1):113–126. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
  21. Leibetseder M, Laireiter AR, Köller T. Structural analysis of the e-scale. Pers Individ Dif 2007;42(3):547-561. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.08.002
  22. Spreng RN, McKinnon MC, Mar RA, et al. The toronto empathy questionnaire: scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. J Pers Assess 2009;91(1):62–71. DOI: 10.1080/00223890802484381
  23. Hojat M, Gonnella JS, Nasca TJ, et al. Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiatry 2002;159(9):1563–1569. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1563
  24. Mercer SW, Maxwell M, Heaney D, et al. The consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure: development and preliminary validation and reliability of an empathy-based consultation process measure. Fam Pract 2004;21(6):699–705. DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmh621
  25. Mercer SW, McConnachie A, Maxwell M, et al. Relevance and practical use of the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure in general practice. Fam Pract 2005;22(3):328–334. DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmh730
  26. Bikker AP, Fitzpatrick B, Murphy D, et al. Measuring empathic, person-centred communication in primary care nurses: validity and reliability of the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure. BMC Fam Pract 2015;16:149. DOI: 10.1186/s12875-015-0374-y
  27. Grühn D, Rebucal K, Diehl M, et al. Empathy across the adult lifespan: longitudinal and experience-sampling findings. Emotion 2008;8(6):753–765. Doi: 10.1037/a0014123
  28. Hanževački M, Jakovina T, Bajić Ž, et al. Reliability and validity of the croatian version of consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure in primary care setting. Croat Med J 2015;56(1):50–56. DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2015.56.50
  29. Babar MG, Hasan SS, Yong WM, et al. Patients’ perceptions of dental students’ empathic, person-centred care in a dental school clinic in Malaysia. J Dent Educ 2017;81(4):404–412. DOI: 10.21815/JDE.016.008
  30. Beadle JN, de la Vega CE. Impact of aging on empathy: review of psychological and neural mechanisms. Front Psychiatry 2019;10:331. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00331
  31. Kalyan VS, Manjula S, Padma T M, et al. Assessment of empathy among clinical dental students in a teaching dental institution in Telangana State, India. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent 2017;15(2):162–165. DOI: 10.4103/jiaphd.jiaphd_174_16
  32. Dores AR, Martins H, Reis AC, et al. Empathy and coping in allied health sciences: gender patterns. Healthcare (Basel) 2021;9(5):497. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9050497
  33. Löffler CS, Greitemeyer T. Are women the more empathetic gender? the effects of gender role expectations. Curr Psychol 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-020-01260-8
  34. Sommerlad A, Huntley J, Livingston G, et al. Empathy and its associations with age and sociodemographic characteristics in a large UK population sample. PLoS One 2021;16(9):e0257557. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257557
  35. Keltner D, Kogan A, Piff PK, et al. The sociocultural appraisals, values, and emotions (SAVE) framework of prosociality: core processes from gene to meme. Annu Rev Psychol 65:425–460. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115054
  36. Piff PK, Kraus MW, Côté S, et al. Having less, giving more: the influence of social class on prosocial behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 2010;99(5):771–784. DOI: 10.1037/a0020092
  37. Díaz-Narváez V, Gutierrez-Ventura F, de Villalba T, et al. Empathy levels of dentistry students in Peru and Argentina. Health 2015;7(10):1268–1274. DOI: 10.4236/health.2015.710141
  38. Sevrain-Goideau M, Gohier B, Bellanger W, et al. Forum theater staging of difficult encounters with patients to increase empathy in students: evaluation of efficacy at the University of Angers Medical School. BMC Med Educ 2020;20(1):58. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-1965-4
  39. Nazir M, Alhareky M, Alqahtani A, et al. Measuring empathy among dental students and interns: a cross-sectional study from Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Int J Dent 2021;2021:5584423. DOI: 10.1155/2021/5584423
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.