Clinical empathy and relational continuity mitigate care fragmentation for patients with multiple long-term conditions: a qualitative study

Stella Arakelyan; Bruce Guthrie; Atul Anand; Nazir Lone; Stewart W Mercer; Tricia Tooman

doi:10.3399/BJGP.2026.0171

Published eLetters

eLetter submission guidelines

Submit a Response to This Article

Compose eLetter

Title *

Author Information

Contributors

First Name and Middle Initial *

First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.

Last Name *

Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.

Email Address *

Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson{at}gmail.com. PLEASE NOTE: your email address will be published.

Occupation *

Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.

Affiliation *

Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.

Statement of Competing Interests

Competing interests? *

Yes

Please describe the competing interests

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

Relational continuity and the predictability of care
Koki Kato

Published on: 24 September 2026
The consultation - 'The Element' of general practice
Lloyd D. Hughes

Published on: 22 September 2026

Published on: (24 September 2026)
Page navigation anchor for Relational continuity and the predictability of care
Relational continuity and the predictability of care
Koki Kato, GP, Madoka Family Clinic
Arakelyan et al. provide an important account of clinical empathy and relational continuity as stabilising influences within fragmented and unpredictable care systems. Their findings show how previous experiences shape expectations and subsequent engagement, creating feedback loops through which apparently small interactions can have disproportionate effects on trust and care-seeking.¹

These findings draw attention to two forms of uncertainty experienced by patients with multiple long-term conditions. One concerns what will happen to their health: the clinical uncertainty arising from complex and evolving illness. Another concerns what will happen to their care as needs change. Will appropriate help be accessible? Will concerns be heard? Will care remain connected across organisational and professional boundaries? In fragmented systems, uncertainty about care itself may compound the uncertainty of illness.

Relational continuity may be particularly important in addressing this second form of uncertainty. It cannot necessarily make the course of illness more predictable, but it may make care more predictable — more accessible, responsive, and connected as needs change. This matters because care unfolds over time, and patients with multiple long-term conditions repeatedly face decisions about whether, when, and how to seek further help. Relational continuity may therefore stabilise care not simply by improving individual encounters, b...
Show More

Arakelyan et al. provide an important account of clinical empathy and relational continuity as stabilising influences within fragmented and unpredictable care systems. Their findings show how previous experiences shape expectations and subsequent engagement, creating feedback loops through which apparently small interactions can have disproportionate effects on trust and care-seeking.¹

These findings draw attention to two forms of uncertainty experienced by patients with multiple long-term conditions. One concerns what will happen to their health: the clinical uncertainty arising from complex and evolving illness. Another concerns what will happen to their care as needs change. Will appropriate help be accessible? Will concerns be heard? Will care remain connected across organisational and professional boundaries? In fragmented systems, uncertainty about care itself may compound the uncertainty of illness.

Relational continuity may be particularly important in addressing this second form of uncertainty. It cannot necessarily make the course of illness more predictable, but it may make care more predictable — more accessible, responsive, and connected as needs change. This matters because care unfolds over time, and patients with multiple long-term conditions repeatedly face decisions about whether, when, and how to seek further help. Relational continuity may therefore stabilise care not simply by improving individual encounters, but by supporting continued engagement with care across encounters.

Safety-netting provides one practical illustration. Its effectiveness depends not only on advice about when to seek further help, but also on there being a credible route back into care.²Relational continuity may help sustain such a route when illness remains uncertain. More broadly, its stabilising value may lie partly in reducing uncertainty about care itself, even when uncertainty about illness cannot be resolved.

References
1. Arakelyan S, Guthrie B, Anand A, et al. Clinical empathy and relational continuity mitigate care fragmentation for patients with multiple long-term conditions: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract. 2026. doi:10.3399/BJGP.2026.0171.
2. Kato K. The relational dimension of safety netting. Br J Gen Pract. 2026;76(769):347–348. doi:10.3399/bjgp26X746157.
Show Less

Competing Interests: None declared.
Published on: (22 September 2026)
Page navigation anchor for The consultation - 'The Element' of general practice
The consultation - 'The Element' of general practice
Lloyd D. Hughes, GP Partner & Honorary Clinical Lecturer, NHS Fife & University of St Andrews
The study by Arakelyan and colleagues demonstrates how clinical empathy and relational continuity mitigate care fragmentation for patients with multiple long-term conditions.¹Highlighting how interpersonal connection buffers against a fractured healthcare system, the authors expose a vital truth. This dynamic can be understood through the theories of the late educationalist Sir Ken Robinson, who argued that human systems thrive not through top-down standardisation, but by cultivating an organic "climate of possibility" that honours individual passion.²

Robinson critiqued conventional institutional frameworks for treating people like interchangeable parts in a mechanistic factory line. This flaw is increasingly visible in modern medicine. Rising clinician specialisation clashes with a patient population that increasingly requires generalists due to multiple long-term conditions and frailty syndromes.³

When primary care is reduced to fragmented, transactional checklists across a rotating multi-disciplinary workforce, the system treats patients as a collection of isolated diagnoses. This strips the clinical encounter of what Robinson called "The Element"—the place where natural aptitude meets personal passion. For a GP, that passion is rooted in deep, relational continuity that turns a medical history into a therapeutic alliance. Arakelyan et al.’s findings¹ prove that when clinicians...
Show More

The study by Arakelyan and colleagues demonstrates how clinical empathy and relational continuity mitigate care fragmentation for patients with multiple long-term conditions.¹Highlighting how interpersonal connection buffers against a fractured healthcare system, the authors expose a vital truth. This dynamic can be understood through the theories of the late educationalist Sir Ken Robinson, who argued that human systems thrive not through top-down standardisation, but by cultivating an organic "climate of possibility" that honours individual passion.²

Robinson critiqued conventional institutional frameworks for treating people like interchangeable parts in a mechanistic factory line. This flaw is increasingly visible in modern medicine. Rising clinician specialisation clashes with a patient population that increasingly requires generalists due to multiple long-term conditions and frailty syndromes.³

When primary care is reduced to fragmented, transactional checklists across a rotating multi-disciplinary workforce, the system treats patients as a collection of isolated diagnoses. This strips the clinical encounter of what Robinson called "The Element"—the place where natural aptitude meets personal passion. For a GP, that passion is rooted in deep, relational continuity that turns a medical history into a therapeutic alliance. Arakelyan et al.’s findings¹ prove that when clinicians are structurally afforded the time to operate "in their element," clinical empathy naturally emerges to de-fragment care.

This carries urgent implications for medical leadership. If health policy leaders prioritise rapid, disconnected access over long-term human relationships, they will continue to fuel both care fragmentation and clinician burnout. Empathy is not an infinite resource; it reflects the personal and professional pressures on an individual. The Scottish Government have recently started 2026-27 frailty and continuity direct enhanced service, showing that this area is being increasingly valued by policy makers.⁴ A recent BJGP Life article highlighted the opposite challenge facing pressured clinicians: ‘ambivalent care’, which has profound consequences for patients.⁵

Healthcare leaders must create environments that actively support relational continuity, targeted toward patients with the most to gain. Only by protecting the professional passion of our workforce can we ensure that vulnerable patients with complex needs are cared for by clinicians structurally supported to remain "in their element."

References

1. Arakelyan S, Guthrie B, Anand A et al. Clinical empathy and relational continuity mitigate care fragmentation for patients with multiple long-term conditions. Br J Gen Pract 21 September 2026; BJGP.2026.0171.
2. Robinson K. Ted Talk: How to escape education's death valley (2013). Available from: https://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley (accessed: 22 Sep 2026).
3. Akhtar W, Camporota L. Generalism and specialism: Reasserting the value of specialist knowledge in an era of multimorbidity. Future Healthc J. 2026 Jun 25;13(3):100548.
4. Scottish Government. Frailty – Directed Enhanced Service 2026-27. Available from: www.publications.scot.nhs.uk/publication/8762 Last Accessed: 22nd September 2026.
5. Smyth et al (2026). Ambivalent care: when patients feel unheard and unsupported. Available from: https://bjgplife.com/ambivalent-care-when-patients-feel-unheard-and-unsupported (accessed: 22 Sep 2026).
Show Less

Competing Interests: None declared.