Do Women or Men Make the Best Doctors?

[AMCoffeePMWine]

This study from Canada is very interesting. Asking if the reason for better outcomes is because current doctors coming out of Med school have more up to date skills.

www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20210719/do-women-or-men-make-the-best-doctors?ecd=soc_tw_210721_cons_news_doctorstudy&linkId=100000056171192

The sole point of this thread is to highlight the fact that, in certain areas, women are better than men.

Many posters on this thread agree.

The whole point of this board is usually to highlight the fact that, in most areas, men aren't better than women.
Ridiculously sexist stereotyping doesn't help, and is the reason women are pushed into low paid jobs like nursing, home help, care, teaching, etc.

The best Drs are the best communicators.

The ones who listen to their patients and hear what they aren’t saying them as well as what they are.

Having a penis or vagina is not relevant.

But who are the best communicators?

In general it's women. Posts on this thread, on a feminist board, agree with this. Women are better communicators and are therefore better suited to the caring professions we're communication is key

No - women are socialised to listen and be better at communicating. There’s nothing inherent about my sex that makes me that way but the expectation that girls should play nice, talk and not display any aggressive tendencies. They are given dolls to play with and mirror nurturing roles from a very young age and hence are perceived to be better carera.

Really depends on the person surely. I've had a wonderfully understanding male urology consultant. The female urology registrar on the other hand...

And the current male anaesthetic consultant I see for pain management is a great listener but also seems to be technically very good ( had great results from procedures he has done).

Posts on this thread, on a feminist board, agree with this.

Some do, plenty don't.

Enough do to perpetuate the point of view that women are better at caring.

If several.posts on a feminist board perpetuate this then amongst the wider female population the view will be perpetuated far more frequently.

It was a female doctor who triggered my phobia of health care professionals. But she wasn't alone. Several other female hcp were extremely dismissive of me and made me feel like shit and not human and didn't respect me and how I was feeling. I've personally had more bad experiences with women then men.

I tend to find dealing with male doctors harder, but ive felt more listened to and treated as an individual by male HCPs. But i would be particularly funny about a male HCP in certain scenarios too.

The problem here isn't about male v female hcps. Its about ability to connect and engage with patients. Some patients will just connect better with males/females for a whole host of reasons unrelated to health but because they do, it means their experience with a particular HCP will be better.

Some patients will fare better with males. Some with females. And the counter is also true.

Instead of looking primarily at sex on this, i definitely think you have to look at a whole host of reasons why patients have particular underlying preferences for who they are cared for - and what underpins this.

Jurgen

What in my post do you disagree with?

completely anecdotal but I think women docs are better at listening to you. A young female A&E doctor saved a family member last year, she suggested it was X (rare condition) but said other docs thought it was unlikely but they were going to run tests. She was right & the fast treatment was invaluable.

I don't want empathy, I want skill. Descriptions such as "good listener" and "good communicator" seem vague to the point of uselessness. I describe my problem as succinctly as possible( having googled it first). The doctor presents solutions (or none) as succinctly as possible. I decide on the treatment.

I'm not following the thread sorry but just remembered that the suicide rate in female GPs is unusually high.

2.5- 4 X the general population.

www.bbc.com/news/health-45356349

bjgp.org/content/68/669/168

I read ages ago it was possibly because patients were more likely to open up more to female doctors, to share all sorts of problems, and whether empathetic or not the female docs were being exposed to this additional load.

While with male docs the patients were more likely to keep it on a more business like basis, as it were, about the specific thing being seen for.

That may well feed into this topic (if it's already been mentioned then apologies!).

I once read a study and I can't remember from where that in cardiology, statistically women have a worse outcome if treated by a male.

Both sexes treated by a female physician have the same outcome.

But there are some many variables. Men taking once risky cases. Females knowing when not to operate.

@toomanytrees

I don't want empathy, I want skill. Descriptions such as "good listener" and "good communicator" seem vague to the point of uselessness. I describe my problem as succinctly as possible( having googled it first). The doctor presents solutions (or none) as succinctly as possible. I decide on the treatment.

I had a lot of surgery in children's hospital as a child. In and out for longish stays for years.

The surgeon was God.

Ahead of his rounds the nurses would make sure everything was in order and everything he might need was there.

There would be a bit of an atmosphere while waiting.

He would come in with about 10 to 15 people.

Maybe 5 students. The nurse in charge would have to join the group. A physio. Various others no idea what they did.

He would come and give a brief summary of the case. He would ask the students to have a look/ brief examination of the patient and share their thoughts.

He'd check over the latest x-rays. And say I dunno. The latest surgery was to do xyz and as you can see it's not given the result aimed for. Ask the students what they would do. Have a quick exam of patient himself. Maybe say next moves or give options he was considering.

The gang with him looked terrified tbh.

Then they'd all move on.

That was definitely an example of communication / empathy not on the menu!

I hope that doesn't happen any more.

The other consultants would come alone and sit and talk to their patient.

This is maybe 11- 14 - my age.

There's a balance here!

Be careful what you wish for re communication empathy though I would say. It IS important!

I prefer a competent doctor regardless of sex. I don't find male doctors any more or less patronizing than female doctors.

Oh he was very skilled. Known as one of/ top surgeon in country for this.

When I have other stuff at hosps some ask who did the ops (usually anaesthetists, I suppose ones who have an interest in that area) and when I say name they go oh really!!! In his area he's pretty well known still.

Oh and also.

I have a male GP (retired) close relative.

He always said that when esp women came in they would often have non specific symptoms.

Tired all the time (TATT in the notes)
Just feeling down

He said if you talked it would often come out that they had eg a horrible husband (as he put it- read controlling , DV etc in today's parlance). Or were bereaved. Or had a child who had some major problem they were desperately worried about.

He always said most docs just thought oh another TAAT and gave ADs or whatever.

He was very proud of himself for this- in fact he was no feminist ! But I believe he tried.

My guess is that female GPs tend to ask more, or just get told more.

I don't think that this is superfluous to care. It's beneficial. But needs to be acknowledged in various ways as it seems in many areas (from the bmj link it's common in MH as well) female docs are having this on top of the stated thing they're treating.

I disagree that communication and empathy are the most important characteristics

Ultimately if a surgeon or doctor is crap it doesn't matter how great they are at talking to patients if they are fucking up all their surgeries and missing diagnosis. A good doctor should be skilled and knowledgeable, they should be efficient. Yes communication is important but too often this is prioritised as being nice to the patient, rather than giving them the information they need

I also disagree that surgeons are detached from their patients. In my experience they do care about their patients a great deal, but what a surgeon can offer a patient is surgery. Many are nice and empathetic and you do not have to detach from your patient to offer good surgery.

In @NiceGerbils example what she needed was surgery. The surgeon did the surgery. They gave the opportunity to medical students to learn, they included all members of the team in their discussion. The other surgeons talking to the patients makes the patients happier but it doesn't make them better or create better surgical outcomes, which is actually what the patients need. They don't need to be happy they need good surgical care. And ultimately having other members of the team at ward round allows all teams to be kept up to date, get their opinions and create a multidisciplinary plan which is in the patients best interests.

I do agree though that patients are much more open to disclosing to female doctors

I cant tell you how many times patients will look to me, or my female colleagues over our male colleagues on ward rounds. How many will wait for the consultant to leave the room before disclosing something to me. I'm no more empathetic than my male colleagues but I think a lot of patients will automatically assume the woman is kinder and nicer, and so will disclose more personal information.

VanGuff you seem to be saying there is an issue with NHS docs being trained to communicate ahead of knowing their trade, and that this is directly leading to botched surgeries and missed diagnoses.

Do you have any evidence for that link?

'In @NiceGerbils example what she needed was surgery. The surgeon did the surgery. They gave the opportunity to medical students to learn, they included all members of the team in their discussion. The other surgeons talking to the patients makes the patients happier but it doesn't make them better or create better surgical outcomes, which is actually what the patients need. They don't need to be happy they need good surgical care. And ultimately having other members of the team at ward round allows all teams to be kept up to date, get their opinions and create a multidisciplinary plan which is in the patients best interests.'

Yowzers.

I thought the reaction to my experience would be yikes.

Yay sounds fantastic is.. not what I was expecting!

And I note you don't respond to me directly but refer to me as if I'm not here on the thread.. so no surprise you like his approach!

How do you know-

That surgery was what I needed?
That if I needed surgery his approach was the right one?

I haven't shared that info. You assume he did exactly the best thing. That's very telling.

I also find it interesting that you think a group like that at a bed. None saying even hello to the patient. (Who when I first went- 11 yo). Multiple people examining with no interaction verbally or with eg eye contact. (They did their thing and looked at the area under question or at him).

Is really good practice!

That's what you genuinely think?

What about the bland discussion of the impact of the lifelong issue in front of the child. Using terms like. Complex case. Surgery rather experimental. No guarantee of a good outcome. Etc.

I alluded to this in my post but given the response feels relevant to give more detail.

The atmosphere of fear I mentioned.

What you got out of all that was.

Brilliant! Perfect. Let's have more of that!

Oh you're a hosp doctor!

Crikey.