Clinician Mistrust in Patients: A Survey of Primary and Urgent Care Clinicians in Colorado.

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Eric G Campbell, Hannah Scotch, Christine M Baugh, Matthew DeCamp, Lauren A Taylor, Lindsey E Fish, Matthew K Wynia
{"title":"Clinician Mistrust in Patients: A Survey of Primary and Urgent Care Clinicians in Colorado.","authors":"Eric G Campbell, Hannah Scotch, Christine M Baugh, Matthew DeCamp, Lauren A Taylor, Lindsey E Fish, Matthew K Wynia","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2026.2741045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Few studies have examined clinicians' mistrust in their patients. We explored this concept in greater detail.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a survey (62.8% RR) of clinicians in primary and urgent care clinics at a university health system and a safety net health system in Denver, Colorado. The survey measured the frequency of clinician mistrust in patients, attitudes about mistrusting patients, perceived benefits and harms of mistrusting patients, and factors associated with mistrusting patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On the survey virtually all clinicians (99.5%) indicated they mistrusted some patients, though the vast majority did so \"Rarely\" (70%) or \"Sometimes\" (28.6%). Most (57.5%) said it is sometimes ethical to mistrust patients, but 91.3% said mistrusting patients increases the risk of patients mistrusting them, 89% said it increases the risk of a negative patient review, and 68.2% said it might reduce the patient's future access to care. Clinicians attributed mistrust to patient-level behaviors and to institutional and societal factors. In a multivariable model, practicing in a safety net setting (OR 2.07, 95 CI 1.03-4.25) and feeling burned out (OR 2.51, 95 CI 1.02-6.48) were associated with higher odds of mistrusting patients, while spending less than 50% of professional time in clinical care was associated with lower odds (OR 0.20, 95 CI 0.05-0.62).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most clinicians mistrust patients rarely or sometimes, and several institutional and societal factors contribute to this mistrust. Interventions to measure and improve trust in patient-clinician relationships should consider its bidirectional nature and how institutional and societal policy decisions can affect mistrust.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2026.2741045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Few studies have examined clinicians' mistrust in their patients. We explored this concept in greater detail.

Methods: We performed a survey (62.8% RR) of clinicians in primary and urgent care clinics at a university health system and a safety net health system in Denver, Colorado. The survey measured the frequency of clinician mistrust in patients, attitudes about mistrusting patients, perceived benefits and harms of mistrusting patients, and factors associated with mistrusting patients.

Results: On the survey virtually all clinicians (99.5%) indicated they mistrusted some patients, though the vast majority did so "Rarely" (70%) or "Sometimes" (28.6%). Most (57.5%) said it is sometimes ethical to mistrust patients, but 91.3% said mistrusting patients increases the risk of patients mistrusting them, 89% said it increases the risk of a negative patient review, and 68.2% said it might reduce the patient's future access to care. Clinicians attributed mistrust to patient-level behaviors and to institutional and societal factors. In a multivariable model, practicing in a safety net setting (OR 2.07, 95 CI 1.03-4.25) and feeling burned out (OR 2.51, 95 CI 1.02-6.48) were associated with higher odds of mistrusting patients, while spending less than 50% of professional time in clinical care was associated with lower odds (OR 0.20, 95 CI 0.05-0.62).

Conclusions: Most clinicians mistrust patients rarely or sometimes, and several institutional and societal factors contribute to this mistrust. Interventions to measure and improve trust in patient-clinician relationships should consider its bidirectional nature and how institutional and societal policy decisions can affect mistrust.

临床医生对患者的不信任:对科罗拉多州初级和紧急护理临床医生的调查。
背景:很少有研究调查临床医生对患者的不信任。我们更详细地探讨了这个概念。方法:我们对科罗拉多州丹佛市一所大学卫生系统和一个安全网卫生系统的初级和急诊诊所的临床医生进行了一项调查(62.8% RR)。调查测量了临床医生对患者的不信任频率、对不信任患者的态度、对不信任患者的利与害的感知,以及与不信任患者相关的因素。结果:在调查中,几乎所有的临床医生(99.5%)都表示他们不信任一些病人,尽管绝大多数人“很少”(70%)或“有时”(28.6%)这样做。大多数人(57.5%)表示,有时不信任病人是合乎道德的,但91.3%的人表示,不信任病人会增加病人不信任他们的风险,89%的人说这会增加病人负面评价的风险,68.2%的人说这可能会减少病人未来获得护理的机会。临床医生将不信任归因于患者层面的行为以及制度和社会因素。在多变量模型中,在安全网环境中执业(OR 2.07, 95 CI 1.03-4.25)和感觉倦怠(OR 2.51, 95 CI 1.02-6.48)与不信任患者的几率较高相关,而在临床护理中花费少于50%的专业时间与较低的几率相关(OR 0.20, 95 CI 0.05-0.62)。结论:大多数临床医生很少或有时不信任患者,一些制度和社会因素促成了这种不信任。衡量和改善医患关系信任的干预措施应考虑其双向性质,以及制度和社会政策决定如何影响不信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书