IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v20y1985i1p47-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient reactions to doctors' computer use in general practice consultations

Author

Listed:
  • Brownbridge, Garry
  • Herzmark, Guy A.
  • Wall, Toby D.

Abstract

This paper describes an experimental field study of patient reactions to computer use by doctors during general practice consultations. The computer system offered facilities for the review of medical histories and the entry of individual encounter notes. Questionnaire assessments of patient reactions were obtained from 127 patients who had just consulted a doctor who was using the computer and from 216 control patients for whom conventional procedures had been retained. Contrary to many doctors' concerns no overall negative effects were recorded for patient reactions. There were no differences between the experimental and control conditions with respect to patients' perceptions of the doctors' attentiveness and rapport, patients' satisfaction with information received, their confidence in the treatment received, their expected compliance or post-consultation stress. A relation was however apparent between post-consultation stress and attitudes to the idea of doctors using computers in the consulting room, in which unfavourable attitudes were associated with reports of higher stress, and conversely. The results suggest that patient reactions to the consultation are more affected by which doctor they see than by whether or not the doctor is using a computer. However, the findings relate to only a short period of computer use in an experimental context and the effects of more established computer use remain a matter for further enquiry.

Suggested Citation

  • Brownbridge, Garry & Herzmark, Guy A. & Wall, Toby D., 1985. "Patient reactions to doctors' computer use in general practice consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 47-52, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:1:p:47-52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(85)90310-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:1:p:47-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.