Background We designed this observational study to investigate the level of patients’ and doctors’ ratings of patient-centred aspects of the primary care consultation. Methods Questionnaire study with patients and doctors. Consecutive patients in a primary care setting and 16 doctors responding post visit. Results are presented as proportions with 95% confidence intervals. Results 411 questionnaires, 223 from patients and 188 from doctors, covered 251 consultations. Both patients and doctors gave the highest possible estimations on the aspects of patient-centred communication and satisfaction less frequently when the patient had other reasons for visit than purely somatic. Unlike the doctors’ estimations, the frequency of highest possible estimations in patient responses dropped if the patients had two to six reasons for visit rather than one. Among the six patient-centred aspects, both patients and doctors gave the highest possible estimation least frequently on the aspect of shared decision-making. Conclusion The results suggest that the nature of the reason, as well as the number of reasons for visit, interferes with the doctors’ level of patient-centred communication. Our results furthermore confirm the findings of previous studies that doctors insufficiently involve patients in their care. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0959-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cyclosporine A (CsA) therapy based on 2-h concentrations (C2) after oral administration has demonstrated low acute rejection rates after solid organ transplantation. We analysed the correlation between C2 and trough (C0) levels of oral CsA therapy in samples obtained twice in consecutive weeks from 58 patients during their first admission for allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Also 8-h concentration curves were obtained from 23 patients. The mean (range) CsA dose was 332 (167-763) and 255 (113-575) mg/day for patients with matched unrelated donor (MUD) and human leukocyte antigen identical sibling donor (Sib), respectively. Median (range) C0 and C2 were 254 (145-332) and 898 (419-1466) ng/ml in MUD patients, and 130 (93-265) and 554 (196-988) ng/ml in Sib patients. In MUD patients with either aGVHD grade oII or XII, the median C2 were 915 (419-1466) and 890 (519-1399) ng/ ml, respectively. In Sib patients with aGVHD grade oII or grade XII, the median C2 were 552 (404-718) and 539 (196-988) ng/ml, respectively. The median C2 levels were comparable in patients with or without severe infections. Interindividual variations in CsA uptake and metabolism may explain the wide variation of C2 levels without prediction for increased risk for severe aGVHD or infectious complication when C0 guided the CsA dosing.

Background This study was designed to investigate how patient-reported shared decision-making relates to other aspects of patient centredness and satisfaction. Methods Questionnaire study with patients. Consecutive patients in primary care responding post visit. Associations are presented as proportions, positive predictive values, with 95% confidence intervals. Results 223 patient questionnaires were included. 62% (95% Confidence interval (CI): 55–69) of the patients indicated the highest possible rating of being involved in the decisions about their ongoing care (self-reported SDM). Self-reported SDM had a positive predictive value (PPV) of between 85% (CI: 77–90) and 95% (CI: 90–98) for five other patient-centred aspects and satisfaction. Conclusion The results suggest that shared decision making is the patient-centred aspect hardest to achieve and that a patient-centred process leading up to the decision-making increases the chance of the patient being involved in the decision-making.