van Dillen S M E, Hiddink G J, Koelen M A, van Woerkum C M J
Communication Management, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005 Aug;59 Suppl 1:S47-55; discussion S56. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602174.
To assess the nutrition communication styles of Dutch family doctors and in particular to assess its psychosocial and sociodemographic correlates.
A cross-sectional study in which a representative sample of 600 Dutch family doctors completed a questionnaire.
The survey was conducted in October and November 2004 in the Netherlands.
A total of 267 family doctors completed the questionnaire (response rate 45%).
Principal component factor analyses with varimax rotation were performed to construct factors. Cronbach's alpha was used as an index of reliability. Our hypothetical model for nutrition communication style was tested using multiple regression analysis, combining the forward and backward procedures under the condition of the same results.
Many family doctors felt at ease with a motivational nutrition communication style. The main predictor for motivational nutrition communication style was task perception of prevention (26%). Some individual and environmental correlates had an additional influence (explained variance 49%). Other styles showed explained variances up to 57%. The motivational style was the best predictor for actual nutrition communication behaviour (35%), while the confrontational style was the best predictor for actual nutrition communication behaviour towards overweight (34%).
In contemporary busy practice, family doctors seem to rely on their predominant nutrition communication style to deal with standard situations efficiently: for the majority, this proved to be the motivational nutrition communication style. Moreover, family doctors used a combination of styles. This study suggests that family doctors behave like chameleons, by adapting their style to the specific circumstances, like context, time and patient. If family doctors communicate about nutrition in general, they select any of the five nutrition communication styles. If they communicate about overweight, they pick either the confrontational or motivational style.
评估荷兰家庭医生的营养沟通方式,尤其评估其心理社会因素和社会人口学相关因素。
一项横断面研究,600名荷兰家庭医生的代表性样本完成了一份问卷。
2004年10月和11月在荷兰进行了该调查。
共有267名家庭医生完成了问卷(回复率45%)。
进行主成分因子分析并采用方差最大化旋转来构建因子。使用Cronbach's α作为可靠性指标。在相同结果条件下,结合向前和向后程序,使用多元回归分析对我们关于营养沟通方式的假设模型进行检验。
许多家庭医生对激励性营养沟通方式感到自在。激励性营养沟通方式的主要预测因素是预防任务感知(26%)。一些个体和环境相关因素有额外影响(解释方差49%)。其他方式的解释方差高达57%。激励性方式是实际营养沟通行为的最佳预测因素(35%),而对抗性方式是针对超重患者实际营养沟通行为的最佳预测因素(34%)。
在当代繁忙的医疗实践中,家庭医生似乎依靠其主要的营养沟通方式来高效处理标准情况:对大多数人来说,这被证明是激励性营养沟通方式。此外,家庭医生使用多种方式的组合。本研究表明,家庭医生就像变色龙一样,根据具体情况(如背景、时间和患者)调整其沟通方式。如果家庭医生一般地谈论营养问题,他们会选择五种营养沟通方式中的任何一种。如果他们谈论超重问题,他们会选择对抗性或激励性方式。