A recent study reveals that the language clinicians use when discussing patients has a significant impact on their empathy levels and memory for crucial health information.
When healthcare professionals, such as doctors and nurses, exchange patient information during shift changes, this process—known as a “handoff”—is influenced by the terms they choose, often more than they may be aware. A new study published in JAMA Network Open indicates that the use of negatively biased language leads to reduced empathy toward the patient. In some instances, it also affects clinicians’ ability to remember important medical details about the patient. Though these shifts in perception can be subtle and unintentional, they accumulate over time and may ultimately affect the quality of care patients receive.
“There’s a lot happening cognitively here – how we, as clinicians, process information. When we editorialize or speak negatively about a patient, it can cloud the listener’s mind and impact the care they provide,” stated the lead author, Austin Wesevich, MD, MPH, MS, a hematologist and health services researcher at the University of Chicago Medicine.
This study builds upon earlier research published in JAMA Pediatrics, where Wesevich and colleagues from Duke University recorded and examined real-life handoffs in a large medical facility. Their previous findings revealed that negative or biased language appeared in 23% of these discussions, particularly concerning specific groups, including Black patients or those with obesity.
To explore the effects of these biases on listeners, the researchers created a follow-up experiment involving a survey. Each participating clinician listened to three brief, pre-recorded handoffs designed to mimic real-life scenarios.
For each scenario, two versions were produced: one neutral, which simply outlined the patient’s situation and needs, and another biased, expressing negative stereotypes, assigning blame, or casting doubt on the patient’s credibility. After listening, participants responded to a multiple-choice question to test their retention of key medical information, filled out a survey to gauge their attitude towards the patient, and noted three key takeaways from what they heard.
“Unsurprisingly, our results confirmed that exposure to biased language can lead to less favorable perceptions of a patient,” Wesevich explained. “However, it was particularly striking to discover that when participants perceived blame directed at a patient for their condition, they were less likely to answer correctly regarding the patient’s care.”
Describing a patient using negative language, skepticism, or stereotypes seems to hinder the listener’s ability to remember crucial clinical details, such as lab results, key symptoms, or recommended treatments.
The researchers highlight in their study that patients from racially minoritized groups are at a heightened risk of experiencing medical errors. Reducing bias in handoffs has the potential to foster empathy and lower error rates, both of which are directly tied to health outcomes.
“When we observe that specific types of patients suffer more during these handoffs, it’s critical to take action to address the issue,” Wesevich noted. “Establishing standardized handoffs could protect vulnerable patients by leveling the playing field.”
By advocating for standardized handoffs where only objective, clinically relevant facts are presented—and personal frustrations are kept out—the researchers believe that healthcare organizations can deter bias from infiltrating these essential communications. Some medical groups have begun to issue guidelines to streamline handoffs, and this study reinforces that such initiatives could improve patient care.
While hospital leaders, educators, and policymakers work towards developing standardized guidelines, as well as training to mitigate bias, Wesevich stresses the role patients and families can play. Voicing concerns when something seems amiss, ensuring thorough answers to all questions, and communicating vital information at shift changes can collectively help counteract the impacts of stereotyping, blame, and doubt.
“Healthcare workers often have good intentions, but they are human and can express various biases, both implicit and explicit,” Wesevich pointed out. “Therefore, advocating for oneself or for loved ones is crucial, as there is no guarantee that clinicians fully grasp everything that needs to be known for effective care after a handoff.”
