- Marianne M Lill, medical student1,
- Tim J Wilkinson (tim.wilkinson{at}chmeds.ac.nz), associate professor1
- Correspondence to: Dr Tim Wilkinson, Princess Margaret Hospital, PO Box 800, Christchurch, New Zealand
- Accepted 30 September 2005
Abstract
Objective To document patients' preferred dress styles of their doctors and modes of address.
Design Descriptive survey.
Setting Inpatients and outpatients at a tertiary level hospital, New Zealand.
Participants 202 inpatients and 249 outpatients, mean age 55.9 (SD 19.3) years.
Main outcome measures Ranking of patients' opinions of photographs showing doctors wearing different dress styles. A five point Likert scale was used to measure patient comfort with particular items of appearance.
Results Patients preferred doctors to wear semiformal attire, but the addition of a smiling face was even better. The next most preferred styles were semiformal without a smile, followed by white coat, formal suit, jeans, and casual dress. Patients were more comfortable with conservative items of clothing, such as long sleeves, covered shoes, and dress trousers or skirts than with less conservative items such as facial piercing, short tops, and earrings on men. Many less conservative items such as jeans were still acceptable to most patients. Most patients preferred to be called by their first name, to be introduced to a doctor by full name and title, and to see the doctor's name badge worn at the breast pocket. Older patients had more conservative preferences.
Conclusions Patients prefer doctors to wear semiformal dress and are most comfortable with conservative items; many less conservative items were, however, acceptable. A smile made a big difference.
Footnotes
-
Contributors Both authors were involved in the design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the results, and in writing the paper. ML undertook the data collection. She is guarantor.
-
Funding Summer studentship grant of $NZ5000 from the Medical Council of New Zealand.
-
Competing interests None declared.
-
Ethical approval This study was approved by the Canterbury ethics committee.
- Accepted 30 September 2005
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27