Jan Stöhlmacher: Damit Vertrauen im Sprechzimmer gelingt: Ein persönlicher Wegweiser für Patienten und ihre Angehörigen

Trust in the health care system and especially in the doctor who treats them directly leads to an improvement in treatment outcomes [1]. The doctor's behavior influences the patient's trust [2]. In the national average, about 90% of patients have said for years that they are satisfied with their doctor, but 10% of patients have consistently no good or very good relationship with their doctor over years [http://www.kbv.de/html/ versichertenbefragung.php]. There are clear variations depending on the origin of patients and medical persons or also between the federal states. Already the privacy at the reception of a practice or an impersonal hospital, for example, plays a major role in whether the patient feels accepted or not. In 2021, 39% of respondents were less satisfied or not at all satisfied with the privacy at the reception. In 2017, 6% of patients said that despite explaining the acute problem or illness, they did not understand it. Unfortunately, patients then ask too few questions so as not to hold up the health service operation or the omniscient staff members. “It is one of the most important conversations in a person's life when they find out they are seriously ill,” says Jan Stöhlmacher, a hematologist and oncologist. He accompanied two of his closest relatives through these stages of life, observing his own emotions, reflecting on the behavior of himself and, above all, of his caring medical colleagues. Repeatedly, the reaction of the doctors seemed inappropriate to him. These experiences and his individual way of dealing with his own helplessness led to an intensive study of the topic “Trust – what patients and relatives can do for a good climate of discussion”. Thoughts and suggestions for improving communication can be found in the literature, e.g., with oncological patients [3], [4]. But it is precisely the authentic descriptions of situations from the perspective of an affected relative that enable comprehensible emotional reactions promoting empathy for patients, respect their inviolable dignity and point out possible deficiencies in verbal and non-verbal communication. This perspective is certainly new and not yet sufficiently presented in the literature. For which target groups could the book be of relevant use?