UCL, London, UK.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009 Jul;24(7):770-7. doi: 10.1002/gps.2209.
To determine the proportion of fourth-year medical students who correctly recognise abusive and not abusive care of older people and whether recognition is related to sociodemographic factors and education.
A cross-sectional self-report questionnaire study, using the Caregiving Scenario Questionnaire; measuring recognition of elder abuse according to the Department of Health's definition.
Fourth-year medical students at University College London and the University of Birmingham, UK.
Two hundred and two of 207 students (97.6%) responded. Twenty-nine of 201 (14.4%) identified accepting someone was not clean; 113/200 (56.5%) locking someone in alone; and 160/200 (80.0%) trapping someone in an armchair as abusive. All medical students correctly identified four out of five not abusive responses. Twelve (6.0%) incorrectly identified camouflaging the door to prevent wandering as abusive. Logistic regression analysis found the independent predictors of recognising that locking in alone was abusive were working as a professional carer (OR = 3.33, 95% CI = 1.25-8.89, p < 0.05) and reporting being taught to look for elder abuse (OR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.24-0.89, p < 0.05). Similarly, the independent predictors of recognising that restraint in an armchair was abusive were attending university A versus university B (OR = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.09-5.26, p < 0.05); being of White British versus Asian ethnicity (OR = 4.00, 95% CI = 1.75-9.09, p < 0.01).
Medical students are good at recognising not abusive care, but not as successful at recognising elder abuse. Working as a professional carer was associated with better recognition of abuse, while personal contact with a person with dementia and recalling formal education about abuse were not.
确定四年级医学生正确识别虐待和非虐待老年人护理的比例,以及识别是否与社会人口因素和教育有关。
使用《照顾情景问卷》进行的横断面自我报告问卷调查研究;根据卫生部的定义,衡量对虐待老年人的识别。
英国伦敦大学学院和伯明翰大学的四年级医学生。
207 名学生中有 202 名(97.6%)做出了回应。201 名学生中有 29 名(14.4%)认为接受某人不干净;200 名学生中有 113 名(56.5%)将某人单独锁在里面;200 名学生中有 160 名(80.0%)将某人困在扶手椅中视为虐待。所有医学生都正确识别出五个非虐待反应中的四个。12 名(6.0%)学生错误地将伪装门以防止游荡视为虐待。逻辑回归分析发现,识别单独锁门是虐待行为的独立预测因素是从事专业护理工作(OR=3.33,95%CI=1.25-8.89,p<0.05)和报告接受过寻找虐待老年人的教育(OR=0.46,95%CI=0.24-0.89,p<0.05)。同样,识别在扶手椅上的约束是虐待行为的独立预测因素是在大学 A 就读而不是大学 B(OR=2.38,95%CI=1.09-5.26,p<0.05);为白种英国人而非亚洲人(OR=4.00,95%CI=1.75-9.09,p<0.01)。
医学生善于识别非虐待性护理,但识别虐待老年人的能力却不尽如人意。从事专业护理工作与更好地识别虐待行为有关,而与与痴呆症患者的个人接触和回忆有关虐待的正规教育无关。