Table 3

Intervention effect on primary and secondary outcomes with multilevel regression techniques 1 month and after 6 months after intervention.

1 month6 months
Difference between intervention and control group adjusted for baseline measured direct after the GP interventionDifference between intervention and control group adjusted for baseline measured 6 months after the GP intervention.
Effect size (% of rangea)ß95% CIEffect size (% of rangea)ß95% CI
All patients
 Mutual understanding↓3.00−0.06−0.171 to 0.043↑0.500.01−0.103 to 0.129
 Patient's perception of quality of care↓3.00−0.31−0.742 to 0.127↑0.200.02−0.437 to 0.469
 Patient's satisfaction with the consultationa,b↓0.03−0.124 to 0.068↑0.03−0.060 to 0.122
 Patient's feeling that consideration was showna,b↓0.01−0.107 to 0.096↓0.01−0.092 to 0.071
Western patients
 Mutual understanding↓2.00−0.04−0.168 to 0.095↓3.00−0.06−0.201 to 0.079
 Patient's perception of quality of care↓2.00−0.22−0.721 to 0.275↓2.50−0.25−0.759 to 0.259
 Patient's satisfaction with the consultationa,b↓0.06−0.191 to 0.079↑0.02−0.088 to 0.132
 Patient's feeling that consideration was showna,b↓0.08−0.214 to 0.059↑0.02−0.088 to 0.135
Non-Western patients
 Mutual understanding↓4.00−0.08−0.246 to 0.082↑11.000.210.002 to 0.422
 Patient's perception of quality of care↓4.00+0.40−1.120 to 0.312↑7.000.74−0.005 to 1.494
 Patient's satisfaction with the consultationa,b↑0.03−0.131 to 0.190↑0.14−0.031 to 0.305
 Patient's feeling that consideration was showna,b↓0.03−0.218 to 0.151↑0.12−0.043 to 0.287
  • a Size of the effect: ↓ decreased % of range / ↑ increased % of range of measure.

  • b We computed per physician and per measurement the fraction of patients that were satisfied with (‘felt GP had been considerate’ during) the consultation. The difference between the two groups was tested by means of regression analysis with adjustment for baseline fraction, weighing cases (physicians) with the total number of patients seen at baseline plus at the measurement concerned.