Fukaya Yasuko, Koyama Sachiyo, Kimura Yusuke, Kitamura Takanori
School of Health Sciences, Tokai University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2009 Dec;6(2):91-103. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-7924.2009.00128.x.
Our previous study divided the verbal communication between caregivers and elderly residents at geriatric care facilities into Type I communication (to elicit activities of daily living) and Type II communication (conversation that occurs in normal social life) and found that Type II communication promotes utterances by elderly residents. This study conducted an education intervention to promote Type II talking by caregivers and evaluated the results.
At three geriatric care facilities, 243 caregivers who might care for 36 elderly residents experienced training involving lectures and group discussion to understand the importance of Type II talking and how to apply it to their daily work. A statistical comparison was applied to the changes in Type II talking duration from before the intervention, 1 week after the intervention, and 3 months after the intervention to evaluate the effect of the educational intervention.
At two facilities, the Type II talking duration increased significantly from before the educational intervention to 1 week after the intervention and remained higher after 3 months. However, the educational intervention's effect was not clear at one facility. There was no significant difference in the elderly persons' total utterance duration, but it increased from before the intervention to 1 week after the intervention.
After the educational intervention, the amount of Type II talking by the caregivers increased significantly 1 week after the intervention for two facilities, but although the amount of Type II talking was higher at 3 months than before the intervention, it was not as high as 1 week after the intervention.
我们之前的研究将老年护理机构中护理人员与老年居民之间的言语交流分为I型交流（引出日常生活活动）和II型交流（正常社交生活中发生的对话），并发现II型交流能促进老年居民的言语表达。本研究进行了一项教育干预，以促进护理人员进行II型交流，并对结果进行了评估。
在三家老年护理机构中，243名可能照顾36名老年居民的护理人员参加了包括讲座和小组讨论的培训，以了解II型交流的重要性以及如何将其应用于日常工作。对干预前、干预后1周和干预后3个月II型交流时长的变化进行统计比较，以评估教育干预的效果。
在两家机构中，II型交流时长从教育干预前到干预后1周显著增加，3个月后仍保持较高水平。然而，在一家机构中，教育干预的效果不明显。老年居民的总言语时长没有显著差异，但从干预前到干预后1周有所增加。
教育干预后，两家机构中护理人员的II型交流量在干预后1周显著增加，但尽管3个月时II型交流量高于干预前，但不如干预后1周时高。
