Cross-sectional survey highlights the gap between communication confidence and training in optometry.
Background: Effective communication is central to optometric care; however, structured training in delivering complex or emotionally sensitive information remains limited within undergraduate optometry programmes, particularly in comparison with other healthcare disciplines. Aim: This study explored registered optometrists’ perceptions of communication skills training and their self-reported communication competence within undergraduate optometry education in South Africa. Setting: The study was conducted in South Africa amongst registered optometrists working across diverse clinical settings. Methods: A cross-sectional electronic questionnaire was distributed to registered South African optometrists. The instrument included closed- and open-ended items related to communication training exposure, self-assessed communication ability and perceived challenges. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative responses were thematically analysed. Results: Despite limited formal undergraduate training, most respondents rated their communication positively, with 41.2% rating themselves as good and 38.8% as excellent, while only 1.2% rated themselves as novice. Training was inconsistent: 54.9% reported seldom receiving explicit training on consultation communication, while only 15.2% reported always receiving such training. Empathy was emphasised, with 85.4% agreeing that understanding the patient’s perspective is essential. Language and cultural diversity were recognised as inherent to practice, with 42.8% rating themselves as good and 16.8% as excellent at navigating these differences. Conclusion: The findings reveal a mismatch between optometrists’ high self-reported communication confidence and limited formal undergraduate training. Contribution: The results underscore the need for structured, intentional education in communication skills within optometry curricula to align training with the demands of contemporary clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kruger et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: