Long-term effects of empathy training in surgery residents: a one year follow-up study

Abstract

Objectives: This study is a 1-year follow-up investigation of the retention of the knowledge, attitudes and skills acquired after empathy training. Methods: Eight otolaryngology residents completed 5 assessment measures before and after empathy training and at 1-year. They attended a 90-minute focus group assessing clinical usefulness of the training, attitudes and factors that affect empathy. Results: Qualitative analysis revealed a positive response to the training and application of skills to clinical practices. Quantitative analyses suggest improvement in empathy after training was maintained at 1-year follow-up (p = 0.05). Knowledge of the neurobiology and physiology of empathy remained significantly greater than before the training (p = 0.007). Conclusions: Qualitative data indicate that the training program was well-received and helpful and, follow-up focus groups provided physicians with opportunities for self-reflection and support from peers. Quantitative analysis demonstrated that improvement in self-reported empathy and objective knowledge of the neurobiology of emotions persist at 1-year follow-up. Accordingly, we recommend that empathy training and follow-up booster sessions become a standard component of residency training.

Dynamic brain-to-brain concordance and behavioral mirroring as a mechanism of the patient-clinician interaction

“…To assess the therapeutic empathy attributed to clinicians, patients filled out the validated CARE ( 24 ) scale after the intake and after each MRI visit, while clinicians filled out a modified CARE questionnaire with items phrased from the clinician’s point of view ( 51 , 52 ). Relational empathy was used as a proxy for therapeutic alliance.…”

Empathy across cultures – one size does not fit all: from the ego-logical to the eco-logical of relational empathy

“…Alternatively, “empathy for” can be seen as intentional - an “ecological perception” framed by context (Gibson, 1975 ; Broome, 1981 ), De Turk (2001) and others call for a relational approach to empathy that entails a “co-directional” dynamic interplay between participants leading towards co-construction of a “shared world” of meanings. Studies examining empathy education that focus on perceiving, understanding and responding to the emotions of others with curiosity and humility have shown that empathy with others can be taught (Riess et al, 2011 ; Riess et al,, 2012) and retained one year later (Phillips et al, 2013 ). Relational empathy is a form of contextual (Laughy et al, 2020 ), participatory (Broome, 1991 ), shared learning that occurs dynamically in the moment and likely improves with reflection on experience, as previous examples and commentary on our illustrative case studies suggest.…”

“…notes, in the course of a conversation and professional relationship we can, through “an infinite series of successive approximations,” come closer to achieving shared understanding. This process of seeking mutual understanding requires curiosity and the elements of playfulness and tentativeness rather than “seeking certainty, closure and control” (Phillips et al, 2013 ). It requires attending to contexts and engaging with the other to achieve shared understanding in ways that currently evade ego-logical forms of empathy.…”

Dynamic brain-to-brain concordance and behavioral mirroring as a mechanism of the patient-clinician interaction

“…To assess the therapeutic empathy attributed to clinicians, patients filled out the validated Consultation And Relational Empathy (CARE) (43) scale after the intake and after each MRI visit, while clinicians filled out a modified CARE questionnaire with items phrased from the clinician's point of view (44,45). Relational empathy was used as a proxy for therapeutic alliance.…”