Kääriäinen Maria, Kyngäs Helvi
Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Scand J Caring Sci. 2010 Sep;24(3):548-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2009.00747.x.
The purpose of the study was to describe the quality of patient education evaluated by health personnel. The sample consisted of 916 nurses and physicians working in one hospital in Finland. The data were gathered with a questionnaire developed specifically for this study. The questionnaire measured patient education quality as two dimensions: patient education resources and implementation. The data were analysed using basic and multivariate methods. The overall resources of patient education were quite good. The problems were related to the possibilities for patient education, such as the lack of time, the unsuitability of conditions and the shortage of equipment. In addition, 54% had inadequate knowledge of patients' posttreatment condition and 29% of the impact the illness had on patients' everyday lives. Furthermore, 47% were less skilled in supporting self-care. On the other hand, health personnel's attitudes towards patient education were positive. They were able to use verbal and individual patient education very well, whilst other methods of patient education were used less well and more infrequently. The patient education was implemented largely as patient-centred and interactive. However, the patient was not always taken into account in the planning and evaluation of patient education. Several background variables of the health personnel had a statistically significant connection to patient education resources and implementation. These findings indicate that patient education is largely well implemented, although the resources need to be developed somewhat further.
该研究的目的是描述由卫生人员评估的患者教育质量。样本包括在芬兰一家医院工作的916名护士和医生。数据通过专门为本研究编制的问卷收集。该问卷将患者教育质量衡量为两个维度:患者教育资源和实施情况。数据采用基本方法和多变量方法进行分析。患者教育的总体资源相当不错。问题与患者教育的可能性有关,例如时间不足、条件不合适以及设备短缺。此外,54%的人对患者治疗后的状况了解不足,29%的人对疾病对患者日常生活的影响了解不足。此外,47%的人在支持自我护理方面技能较差。另一方面,卫生人员对患者教育的态度是积极的。他们能够很好地运用口头和个体化的患者教育方式,而其他患者教育方法的运用则不太理想且频率较低。患者教育在很大程度上是以患者为中心且具有互动性地实施的。然而,在患者教育的规划和评估中并不总是考虑到患者。卫生人员的几个背景变量与患者教育资源和实施情况存在统计学上的显著关联。这些发现表明,尽管资源需要进一步改进,但患者教育在很大程度上实施得很好。