What factors affect patients' recall of general practitioners' advice?

BackgroundIn order for patients to adhere to advice, provided by family doctors, they must be able to recall it afterwards. However, several studies have shown that most patients do not fully understand or memorize it. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of demographic characteristics, education, amount of given advice and the time between consultations on recalled advice.MethodsA prospective survey, lasting 30 months, was conducted in an urban family practice in Slovenia. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for poorer recall.Results250 patients (87.7% response rate) received at least one and up to four pieces of advice (2.4 ± 0.8). A follow-up consultation took place at 47.4 ± 35.2 days. The determinants of better recall were high school (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.15-0.99, p = 0.049) and college education (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.10-1.00, p = 0.050), while worse recall was determined by number of given instructions three or four (OR 26.1, 95% CI 3.15-215.24, p = 0.002; OR 56.8, 95% CI 5.91-546.12, p < 0.001, respectively) and re-test interval: 15-30 days (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.06-10.13, p = 0.040), 31-60 days (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.28-8.07, p = 0.013) and more than 60 days (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.05-6.02, p = 0.038).ConclusionsEducation was an important determinant factor and warrants further study. Patients should be given no more than one or two instructions in a consultation. When more is needed, the follow-up should be within the next 14 days, and would be of a greater benefit to higher educated patients.

[1]  Hyeon-Eui Kim,et al.  Improving Patient Comprehension and Recall of Discharge Instructions by Supplementing Free Texts with Pictographs , 2008, AMIA.

[2]  Jan De Maeseneer,et al.  Consultation length in general practice: cross sectional study in six European countries , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  I. Svab,et al.  Agreement in patient-physician communication in primary care: a study from Central and Eastern Europe. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[4]  J. Valderas,et al.  Epidemiology and impact of multimorbidity in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. , 2011, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[5]  S. van Dulmen,et al.  Does age really matter? Recall of information presented to newly referred patients with cancer. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  S. Childs,et al.  The relationship between consultation length, process and outcomes in general practice: a systematic review. , 2002, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[7]  P Ley,et al.  Satisfaction, compliance and communication. , 1982, The British journal of clinical psychology.

[8]  S. Flocke,et al.  Physician-elder interaction in community family practice. , 2004, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[9]  B. Mattsson,et al.  Working behaviour of competent general practitioners: Personal styles and deliberate strategies , 2006, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[10]  R. Kalda,et al.  Structure and duration of consultations in Estonian family practice , 2003, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[11]  P Ley,et al.  Memory for medical information. , 1979, The British journal of social and clinical psychology.

[12]  D. Isaacman,et al.  Standardized instructions: do they improve communication of discharge information from the emergency department? , 1992, Pediatrics.

[13]  I. Svab,et al.  Factors related to consultation time: Experience in Slovenia , 2008, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[14]  R. Safeer,et al.  Health literacy: the gap between physicians and patients. , 2005, American family physician.

[15]  R. Kessels,et al.  Patients’ Memory for Medical Information , 2003, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[16]  L. McGuire,et al.  Remembering what the doctor said: organization and adults' memory for medical information. , 1996, Experimental aging research.

[17]  B. McKinstry,et al.  A systematic review of interventions to improve recall of medical advice in healthcare consultations , 2009, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[18]  A. Wilson,et al.  Consultation length in general practice: a review. , 1991, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[19]  R. Epstein,et al.  Recall-Promoting Physician Behaviors in Primary Care , 2008, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[20]  P. Bradshaw,et al.  Recall of medical advice: comprehensibility and specificity. , 1975, The British journal of social and clinical psychology.

[21]  P Ley,et al.  A method for increasing patients' recall of information presented by doctors , 1973, Psychological Medicine.

[22]  G. Elwyn,et al.  BMC Family Practice , 2005 .

[23]  R. Logie,et al.  Comparison of the accuracy of patients' recall of the content of telephone and face-to-face consultations: an exploratory study , 2011, Postgraduate Medical Journal.

[24]  B. Mattsson,et al.  Factors associated with consultation length and characteristics of short and long consultations. , 1993, Scandinavian journal of primary health care.

[25]  L. Borgquist,et al.  The more time spent on listening, the less time spent on prescribing antibiotics in general practice. , 2002, Family practice.

[26]  Thea Heeren,et al.  Recall in older cancer patients: measuring memory for medical information. , 2008, The Gerontologist.

[27]  Martin Fortin,et al.  Prevalence of Multimorbidity Among Adults Seen in Family Practice , 2005, The Annals of Family Medicine.