Background. Today, the public does not want to be just a passive consumer of health services. Patients often expect to be informed and involved in decisions about their health. With better doctor–patient communication, patients are more likely to follow treatment recommendations. Material and methods. The study was conducted using a face-to-face survey method on a group of 203 adult, independent patients from 2021 to 2022 at a medical facility, i.e., a rehabilitation clinic. Objective. The purpose of this study was to assess the determinants of doctor–patient communication in terms of patient rights. One of patients’ rights is the right to information about their health condition and treatment methods and the right to ask questions when the doctor does not provide details about the treatment or diagnosis or when it is not understandable. Doctors providing information to the patient and the opportunity for the patient to ask questions are key elements in the process of making informed decisions regarding further medical treatment. Therefore, patients were divided into two groups: active (+) and passive in communication (−) with doctors. Results. Patients who were active in communication (33%) wanted to ask questions or had the opportunity to ask the doctor questions, and thus, they were able to take an active part in the discussion with the doctor. In contrast, patients who were passive in communication (67%) did not want to ask questions or did not have the opportunity to ask the doctor questions, and therefore, their active participation in the discussion and thus their right to ask questions may have been limited. The authors’ survey shows that respondents with active communication were significantly more likely than patients with passive communication (almost 100% vs. 86%) to obtain information about their condition (p = 0.002), diagnostic methods (p = 0.003), therapeutic methods (p = 0.00007), treatment results, and prognosis (p = 0.0008). Moreover, almost all respondents with active communication as opposed to respondents with passive communication (95% vs. 52%) rated communication with doctors highest (on a scale from 0 to 5), including credible and professional approach to patients (p < 0.0001), providing information in clear and simple language (p < 0.0001), answering questions asked by patients (p < 0.0001), openness and kindness (p < 0.0001), maintaining professional confidentiality (p < 0.0001), or emotional support (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Hence, the primary key element of the medical consultation is appropriate amount and content of information given to the patient, providing explanations and answering questions. Also importantly, according to the results, active communication between patients and doctors was significantly influenced by female gender, higher education, and a positive evaluation of communication with doctors.

Summary: A new virus, SARS-CoV-2, emerged in December 2019, triggering the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 due to the rapid spread and severity of cases worldwide. In Poland, the first case of COVID-19 was reported on 4 March 2020. The aim of the prevention efforts was primarily to stop the spread of the infection to prevent overburdening the health care system. Many illnesses were treated by telemedicine, primarily using teleconsultation. Telemedicine has reduced personal contact between doctors and patients and reduced the risk of exposure to disease for patients and medical personnel. The survey aimed to gather patients’ opinions on the quality and availability of specialized medical services during the pandemic. Based on the data collected regarding patients’ opinions on services provided via telephone systems, a picture was created of patients’ opinions on teleconsultation, and attention was drawn to emerging problems. The study included a 200-person group of patients, realizing their appointments at a multispecialty outpatient clinic in Bytom, aged over 18 years, with various levels of education. The study was conducted among patients of Specialized Hospital No. 1 in Bytom. A proprietary survey questionnaire was developed for the study, which was conducted on paper and used face-to-face interaction with patients. Results: 17.5% of women and 17.5% of men rated the availability of services during the pandemic as good. In contrast, among those aged 60 and over, 14.5% of respondents rated the availability of services during the pandemic as poor. In contrast, among those in the labor force, as many as 20% of respondents rated the accessibility of services provided during the pandemic as being well. The same answer was marked by those on a pension (15%). Overwhelmingly, women in the age group of 60 and over showed a reluctance toward teleconsultation. Conclusions: Patients’ attitudes toward the use of teleconsultation services during the COVID-19 pandemic varied, primarily due to attitudes toward the new situation, the age of the patient, or the need to adapt to specific solutions not always understood by the public. Telemedicine cannot completely replace inpatient services, especially among the elderly. It is necessary to refine remote visits to convince the public of this type of service. Remote visits should be refined and adapted to the needs of patients in such a way as to remove any barriers and problems arising from this type of service. This system should also be introduced as a target, providing an alternative method of inpatient services even after the pandemic ends.

Background: Health literacy includes the basic competencies needed to improve the quality of communication with medical personnel. Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze the level of health literacy of hospitalized patients and to assess the impact of factors such as age, gender, education, place of residence, the ability to question the doctor about the information provided, and the evaluation of communication with medical personnel on their health literacy. Material and methods: The study was cross-sectional, and a specially designed questionnaire was used to collect data. Patients’ level of health literacy was assessed using the functional, communicative, and critical health literacy (FCCHL) scale. The study included 203 independent adult patients. Results: Higher levels of health literacy were observed more often in younger age groups, among women, people with higher education, and residents of large cities. Patients with a higher level of health literacy rated their communication with medical personnel higher, were more active in communicating with doctors, and asked questions more often, indicating that they were more involved in the medical decision-making process. A larger percentage of these patients believed that their consent to medical services was informed compared to patients with lower health literacy. In addition, patients with higher health literacy were more likely to express the belief that the medical staff spent enough time with them during their visit. Conclusions: The study’s findings underscore the importance of strengthening health education, which can help reduce health literacy disparities and improve health care quality.

Wstęp: Aby spowolnić rozprzestrzenianie się wirusa SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) podczas pandemii, instytucje opieki zdrowotnej na całym świecie wprowadziły zasady mające na celu ograniczenie odwiedzin pacjentów przebywających na oddziałach szpitalnych, co stworzyło ogromne wyzwania dla całego systemu zdrowotnego. Obecność bliskich często ułatwia komunikację i wymianę informacji między pacjentami a pracownikami służby zdrowia.Materiał i metody: W badaniu wzięło udział 203 pełnoletnich, samodzielnych pacjentów oraz 198 osób bliskich. Badanie prowadzono w jednej placówce medycznej, tj. w poradni rehabilitacyjnej, od listopada 2021 r. do marca 2022 r. i miało na celu ocenę, jak pacjenci i ich bliscy postrzegali ograniczenia odwiedzin w szpitalach w trakcie pandemii COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). Pacjentów i ich osoby bliskie podzielono na dwie grupy – na podstawie pozytywnej lub negatywnej oceny ograniczeń.Wyniki: Spośród pacjentów 44% (N = 90) pozytywnie oceniało wprowadzenie ograniczeń, podczas gdy 56% (N = 113) postrzegało je negatywnie. Z kolei spośród osób bliskich pozytywną ocenę wystawiło 41% (N = 82), a 59% (N = 116) wyraziło niezadowolenie z ograniczeń.Wnioski: Badanie wykazało, że zakaz odwiedzin w szpitalach podczas pandemii wywoływał głównie negatywne emocje zarówno u pacjentów (56%), jak i ich bliskich (59%). Mimo restrykcji większość pacjentów i ich rodzin utrzymywała codzienny kontakt za pomocą alternatywnych metod komunikacji, co podkreśla potrzebę dalszego rozwoju zdalnych form kontaktu w szpitalach. Ponadto szpitale zapewniły skuteczne procedury dostarczania rzeczy osobistych oraz udostępniania informacji o stanie pacjentów, co zostało pozytywnie ocenione przez respondentów. W przyszłości należy rozważyć bardziej elastyczne podejście do odwiedzin, na przykład zezwalając na wizyty w wyjątkowych przypadkach.