Warren D, Kissoon N
Department of Pediatrics, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 1989 Jun;5(2):83-5. doi: 10.1097/00006565-198906000-00003.
We prospectively studied a group of patients with mild head injury discharged for home observation to determine whether written instructions assisted in recall of signs and symptoms, increased patient satisfaction, or resulted in any additional benefit over verbal explanations alone. We also evaluated the level of comprehension required to understand the written instructions in their present form. Over a three-month period, 72 patients (43 male, 29 female) with a mean age of 4.4 (SD +/- 3.9) years were studied. In addition to verbal explanations for all parents, 38 parents received written instructions. Each group remembered 4/7 (57%) of signs and symptoms and was equally satisfied with verbal explanations. The majority (84%) of parents who received instruction sheets intended to keep these for further reference. Low recall of two instructions may be due to poor comprehension of the language used. We conclude that written instructions (1) did not add significantly to recall, (2) may provide reassurance to parents, and (3) need to be written in simple lay terms in order to be understood by the parents/patients served.
我们前瞻性地研究了一组因轻度头部受伤而出院接受家庭观察的患者,以确定书面说明是否有助于症状和体征的记忆、提高患者满意度,或者相对于单纯的口头解释是否有任何额外益处。我们还评估了理解当前形式书面说明所需的理解水平。在三个月的时间里,我们研究了72例患者(43例男性,29例女性),平均年龄为4.4岁(标准差±3.9)。除了向所有家长进行口头解释外,38位家长还收到了书面说明。每组都记住了4/7(57%)的症状和体征,并且对口头解释同样满意。大多数(84%)收到说明书的家长打算保留这些以供进一步参考。对两条说明的低记忆率可能是由于对所用语言的理解不佳。我们得出结论,书面说明(1)对记忆没有显著增加,(2)可能会让家长放心,(3)需要用简单易懂的通俗语言来书写,以便为所服务的家长/患者所理解。