How do patients and families evaluate attitude of psychiatrists in Japan?: quantitative content analysis of open-ended items of patient responses from a large-scale questionnaire survey

Abstract

Background: Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) has been widely advocated in psychiatric fields. In Japan, however, PPI has not been implemented in clinical practice. In order to improve quality of psychiatric service in Japan, it is essential to understand psychiatrists’ attitudes from the patients’ perspective as a first step in practicing PPI. This study aimed to investigate the patients’ evaluation of psychiatrists’ attitudes by illustrating themes appeared in the questionnaire survey. Methods: This study used the data obtained from the questionnaire survey responded by 2,683 patients with family members who belong to the family associations for psychiatric patients in Japan. Three open-ended question items in this survey, "criteria for selecting a psychiatrist (784 patient responses, response rate 29.2%),” “attitude of the psychiatrist in charge (929 patient responses, response rate 34.6%)," and "communication skills of the psychiatrist in charge (739 patient responses, response rate 27.5%)" were analyzed by co-occurrence network using KH Coder software. Results: The common theme observed in all three items was whether psychiatrist took sufficient consultation time. The criteria for selecting a psychiatrist were summarized whether psychiatrist provided appropriate advices for patients’ problems, whether psychiatrist cared about patients’ demands and whether psychiatrist informed to patients about diseases and medications. The attitudes of the psychiatrists in charge that patients had most wanted their psychiatrists to improve were: psychiatrists only watch the computer, make diagnosis according to the patients’ individual condition, and try to build a relationship of trust with the patient. The patients’ demands regarding communication skills of the psychiatrist in charge included: whether the psychiatrist communicated in a way that improves the patient's psychological state, whether the psychiatrist was attentive to the patients’ family, and whether the psychiatrist could control his/her own mood during the consultation. Conclusion: The results reflected the patients’ demands that do not appear in closed-ended items. It was suggested that patients’open-ended responses to questionnaires and their involvement in the psychiatric research (PPI) may provide more insight into improving pshchiaric care in Japan.