Predictors of Satisfaction with Obstetric Care in High-risk Pregnancy: The Importance of Patient–Provider Relationship

  • Sheera F. Lerman
  • Golan Shahar
  • Kathryn A. Czarkowski
  • Naamit Kurshan
  • Urania Magriples
  • Linda C. Mayes
  • C. Neill Epperson
Article

Abstract

The study set out to examine the predictive effects of patients’ emotional distress and their relationships with their health care providers on satisfaction with obstetric services in high-risk pregnancies. Participants were 104 pregnant women with a history of recurrent losses, fetal demise, previous or current fetal genetic abnormality, advanced maternal age, or obstetric or medical complications of the present pregnancy. Self-report measures of emotional distress and the quality of their relationships with their medical provider were administered. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to assess the predictive effect of these variables on satisfaction with services. Provision of information, constructive communication, and good relationships predicted elevated satisfaction with health services. Provision of information also buffered against the adverse effect of emotional distress on satisfaction with health services. These findings elucidate the central role of provider–patient interaction, particularly as it is related to provision of information, in high-risk pregnancy.

Keywords

High-risk pregnancy Patient–doctor relationships Emotional distress Medical information Women’s health 

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Appleby, L., Fox, H., Shaw, M., & Kumar, R. (1989). The psychiatrist in the obstetric unit Establishing a liaison service. British Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 510–515.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Attkisson, C. C., & Greenfield, T. K. (1996). The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) Scales and the Service Satisfaction Scale-30 (SS-30). In L. I. Sederer & B. Dockey (Eds.), Outcomes assessment in clinical practice (pp. 120–127). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Witkins.Google Scholar
  4. Attkisson, C. C., & Greenfield, T. K. (1999). The UCSF Client Satisfaction Scales: I. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8. In M. E. Maruish (Eds.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (pp. 1222–1346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, D. M., & Smith, G. C. (1995). Consultation-liaison psychiatry in general medical units. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 29, 424–432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, S., Kessler, R., & Gordon, L. (1995). Measuring stress. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Di Blasi, Z., Harkness, E., Ernst, E., Georgiou, A., & Kleijnen, J. (2001). Influence of context effects on health outcomes: A systematic review. Lancet, 357, 757–762.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunsis, A., & Smith, G. C. (1996). Consultation-liaison psychiatry in an obstetric service. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 30, 63–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Galassi, J. P., Schanberg, R., & Ware, W. B. (1992). The Patient Reactions Assessment: A brief measure of the quality of the patient–provider medical relationship. Psychological Assessment, 4, 346–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harrison, M. J., Kushner, K. E., Benzies, K., Rempel, G., & Kimak, C. (2003). Women’s satisfaction with their involvement in health care decisions during a high-risk pregnancy. Birth, 30, 109–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hrasky, M., & Morice, R. (1986). The identification of psychiatric disturbance in an obstetric and gynaecological population. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 20, 63–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kurki, T., Hiilesmaa, V., Raitasalo, R., Mattila, H., & Ylikorkala, O. (2000). Depression and anxiety in early pregnancy and risk for preeclampsia. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 95, 487–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maruish, M. E. (2002). Psychological testing in the age of managed behavioral health care. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  15. Orr, S. T., & Miller, C. A. (1995). Maternal depressive symptoms and the risk of poor pregnancy outcome. Review of the literature and preliminary findings. Epidemiologic Reviews, 17, 165–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Phillips, N., & Dennerstein, L. (1993). The psychiatrist in an obstetric/gynaecology hospital: Establishing a consultation-liaison service. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 27, 464–471.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Phillips, N., Dennerstein, L., & Farish, S. (1996). Psychological morbidity in obstetric-gynecology patients: Testing the need for expanded psychiatry services in obstetric-gynecology facilities. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 30, 74–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Roter, D. L., Geller, G., Bernhardt, B. A., Larson, S. M., & Doksum, T. (1999). Effects of obstetrician gender on communication and patient satisfaction. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 93(5 Pt 1), 635–641.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. StatSoft, Inc. (2004). STATISTICA (data analysis software system). Tulsa: http://www.startsoft.com
  20. Stewart, D. E., & Lippert, G. P. (1988). Psychiatric consultation-liaison services to an obstetric and gynecology department. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 33, 285–289.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheera F. Lerman
    • 1
  • Golan Shahar
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kathryn A. Czarkowski
    • 2
  • Naamit Kurshan
    • 2
  • Urania Magriples
    • 3
  • Linda C. Mayes
    • 4
  • C. Neill Epperson
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyBen-Gurion University of the NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive SciencesYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  4. 4.Yale Child Study CenterNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations