LAUSR

referenCes 1. Stewart MA. Effective physician‐patient communication and health outcomes: A review. CMAJ 1995;152:1423‐33. 2. Pamungkasih W, Sutomo AH, Agusno M. Description of patient acceptance of use of mask by doctor at poly out‐patient care Puskesmas, Bantul. Review of Primary Care Practice and Education (Kajian Praktik dan Pendidikan Layanan Primer). 2019;2(2):70‐75. 3. Tang JI, Shakespeare TP, Zhang XJ, Lu JJ, Liang S, Wynne CJ, et al. Patient satisfaction with doctor–patient interaction in a radiotherapy centre during the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak. Australas Radiol 2005;49:304‐11. 4. Mercer SW, Maxwell M, Heaney D, Watt G. The consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure: Development and preliminary validation and reliability of an empathy‐based consultation process measure. Fam Pract 2004;21:699‐705. 5. Wong CK, Yip BH, Mercer S, Griffiths S, Kung K, Wong MC, et al. Effect of facemasks on empathy and relational continuity: A randomised controlled trial in primary care. BMC Fam Pract 2013;14:1‐7. Patients did not feel much hindrance in explaining their concern to the doctors. But doctors had difficulty during practice and occasionally felt the urge to remove the masks for the sake of detailed clinical examination. Previous studies suggested a significant negative impact on the patient’s perceived empathy and diminish the positive effects of relational continuity which differs from our study finding possibly due to cultural differences across countries.[5] Although, future research with a large sample size could compare the cross‐cultural difference and further explain this complex observation, but the authors sincerely hope that we will see the end of the pandemic soon and use of mask during routine clinical interaction becomes optional.