Patient-Doctor Relationships Across Cultures: Kuwait, Ireland, and the Netherlands

A Basic Subjective Comparative Observation of Kuwait, Ireland, and the Netherlands to Examine Cultural Differences in Patient-Doctor Relationships Based on Personal Experience

By: Mohamad F A Almutairi

Introduction

While many social, cultural, and institutional elements in different countries greatly influence the quality of healthcare, it mostly depends on the interaction between patients and clinicians. With an eye on Kuwait, the Netherlands, and Ireland, this article aims to investigate the subtleties of this relationship, underlining the several approaches from paternalistic to patient-centered models.

The customs and values of a certain society greatly affect how doctors and patients interact with one another. Patients and doctors have a sometimes one-sided connection in Kuwait. Doctors are seen as the ultimate power whose decisions are hardly questioned (Rocque & Leanza, 2015).

This captures the national organized healthcare system as well as the cultural values stressing confidence in doctors' knowledge. Kuwaiti patients generally rely on their doctors to make wise decisions for them. Hence, the opportunity to contact experts straight without depending on referrals strengthens this relationship.

By contrast, the Netherlands stresses a patient-oriented, cooperative approach to treatment. Developing long-term connections and mutual trust with their patients depends much on general practitioners. A fundamental component of treatment is group decision-making in which patients actively participate in conversations regarding their treatment. This strategy encourages personal choice and helps people to participate more actively in their medical decisions.

Inspired by its public-private healthcare system, Ireland presents a fusion of authoritative and patient-oriented relationships.  

Kuwaiti Patient-Doctor Relationships: An Approach Based on Care

In Kuwait, the relationship between patients and doctors sometimes reflects a paradigm whereby doctors are seen as the main authority. And so their judgments are not questioned. However, there is increasing mistrust in doctors and a rise in the culture of blame. This shows both the organized character of the healthcare system and the societal focus on the confidence resulting from medical knowledge.

Usually trusting their doctors to make the best decisions for them, Kuwaiti patients benefit from direct access to specialists instead of requiring time-consuming referrals. This has led to an increased workload on specialists, leading to increased chances of disruption of high-quality care.

This controlling approach may especially limit opportunities for open dialogue and collaborative decision-making on sensitive topics. Despite this strategy relying on the traditional belief that the "doctor knows best," it is crucial to evaluate these methods in the context of societal shifts, technological advancements, and the growing emphasis on patient autonomy. 

Dutch Patient-Doctor Interactions: Dynamic Collaboration

Unlike Kuwait, the Netherlands stresses in healthcare a cooperative and patient-oriented approach. Building mutual trust with patients and developing long-term relationships depend much on general practitioners.

A basic component of treatment is group decision-making in which patients actively participate in conversations concerning their treatment. This method encourages personal empowerment and more involvement in choices regarding personal health care. 

The strategy concentrated on the demands of the Dutch patient, which is very different from the more authoritarian style observed in Kuwait. By enabling people to participate actively in their treatment, the Dutch healthcare system seeks to improve patient involvement, raise health standards, and therefore create a fairer relationship between patients and doctors.

Irish Healthcare: An All-Inclusive Strategy

Ireland presents a well-rounded approach that strikes a compromise between methods emphasizing the individual and those with a more authoritarian attitude in treatment.

Sometimes long waiting times in the public healthcare system reduce chances for cooperative care. But when time and money allow, the values ingrained in Irish society—which stress understanding and personal relationships—help doctors to involve patients in the decision-making process. 

In the private sector, where people have more choice and control, the connection between patients and doctors usually is more focused on the requirements of the patient with collaborative decision-making taking the front stage.

Ireland's healthcare system shows the country's careful approach by combining public and private elements, each of which distinctively affects the dynamics and impact on the relationship between patients and doctors.

Final Notes

A complicated and diversified concept shaped by social, cultural, and systemic elements is the patient-doctor relationship. Comparing Kuwait, the Netherlands, and Ireland side by side reveals the several ways that this relationship is approached—from paternalistic to patient-centered models. 

• The Kuwaiti healthcare system sometimes shows a directing attitude, in which doctors are seen as the main decision-makers and patients usually take second place.

• The Netherlands invites people to participate actively in their healthcare decisions by stressing a cooperative and patient-oriented approach.

• Inspired by its public-private healthcare system, Ireland provides a comprehensive approach combining elements of caring and individualistic emphasis.

References:

1. Purnell LD. The Purnell Model for Cultural Competence. Journal of Transcultural Nursing. 2002;13(3):193. doi:10.1177/10459602013003006

2. Echeverri M, Brookover C, Kennedy K. Nine Constructs of Cultural Competence for Curriculum Development. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2010;74(10):181. doi:10.5688/aj7410181

3. Rocque R, Leanza Y. A Systematic Review of Patients’ Experiences in Communicating with Primary Care Physicians: Intercultural Encounters and a Balance between Vulnerability and Integrity. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(10). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139577

4. (Claramita & Susilo, 2014). doi:10.1007/s40037-014-0121-4

5. Özdemir S, Malhotra C, Teo I, Tan SNG, Wong W, Joad AK, Hapuarachchi T, Palat G, Tuong PN, Bhatnagar S, Rahman R, Mariam L, Ning XH, Finkelstein E. Patient-Reported Roles in Decision-Making Among Asian Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicountry Study. MDM Policy & Practice. 2021;6(2). doi:10.1177/23814683211061398