• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Instrumental and affective communication with patients with limited health literacy in the palliative phase of cancer or COPD.与癌症或 COPD 终末期患者进行有限健康素养的工具性和情感性沟通。
BMC Palliat Care. 2020 Oct 7;19(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12904-020-00658-2.
2
Affective communication with patients with limited health literacy in the palliative phase of COPD or lung cancer: Analysis of video-recorded consultations in outpatient care.在 COPD 或肺癌的姑息阶段,与健康素养有限的患者进行情感沟通:门诊护理中视频记录的咨询分析。
PLoS One. 2022 Feb 10;17(2):e0263433. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263433. eCollection 2022.
3
'A basic understanding'; evaluation of a blended training programme for healthcare providers in hospital-based palliative care to improve communication with patients with limited health literacy.“基本理解”:评估基于医院的姑息治疗中为医疗保健提供者提供的混合培训计划,以改善与健康素养有限的患者的沟通。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Aug 11;22(1):613. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03685-0.
4
Towards appropriate information provision for and decision-making with patients with limited health literacy in hospital-based palliative care in Western countries: a scoping review into available communication strategies and tools for healthcare providers.在西方国家基于医院的姑息治疗中为健康素养有限的患者提供适当的信息和决策支持:针对医疗保健提供者可用的沟通策略和工具的范围综述。
BMC Palliat Care. 2019 Apr 12;18(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0421-x.
5
Persuasive communication in medical decision-making during consultations with patients with limited health literacy in hospital-based palliative care.在医院姑息治疗中与健康素养有限的患者进行咨询时的医学决策中的说服性沟通。
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 May;105(5):1130-1137. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.022. Epub 2021 Aug 25.
6
Communication and shared decision-making with patients with limited health literacy; helpful strategies, barriers and suggestions for improvement reported by hospital-based palliative care providers.与健康素养有限的患者进行沟通和共同决策;医院姑息治疗提供者报告的有用策略、障碍和改进建议。
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 19;15(6):e0234926. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234926. eCollection 2020.
7
Diabetes self-management support for patients with low health literacy: Perceptions of patients and providers.针对健康素养较低患者的糖尿病自我管理支持:患者与医护人员的看法。
J Diabetes. 2015 May;7(3):418-25. doi: 10.1111/1753-0407.12191. Epub 2014 Sep 10.
8
Factors Affecting Health Literacy as Related to Asthma and COPD Management: Learning from Patient and Health Care Professional Viewpoints.影响哮喘和 COPD 管理的健康素养因素:从患者和医疗保健专业人员的观点中学习。
Health Lit Res Pract. 2021 Jul;5(3):e179-e193. doi: 10.3928/24748307-20210526-01. Epub 2021 Jul 15.
9
Palliative care experiences of adult cancer patients from ethnocultural groups: a qualitative systematic review protocol.不同种族文化群体成年癌症患者的姑息治疗体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):99-111. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1809.
10
Development and evaluation of CAHPS survey items assessing how well healthcare providers address health literacy.开发和评估 CAHPS 调查项目,以评估医疗服务提供者在解决健康素养方面的表现。
Med Care. 2012 Sep;50(9 Suppl 2):S3-11. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182652482.

引用本文的文献

1
Visual decision aids to support communication and shared decision-making: How are they valued and used in practice?支持沟通与共同决策的视觉决策辅助工具:它们在实践中如何被重视和使用?
PLoS One. 2024 Dec 3;19(12):e0314732. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314732. eCollection 2024.
2
Compassionate care through the eyes of patients and physicians: An interview study.从患者和医生的视角看关怀照护:一项访谈研究。
PLoS One. 2024 Jul 10;19(7):e0305007. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305007. eCollection 2024.
3
A collaboration to harmonize COVID-19 health messaging and fill communication gaps during initial U.S. refugee resettlement.一项旨在协调新冠疫情健康信息并填补美国难民初步安置期间沟通空白的合作。
Health Lit Commun Open. 2024;2(1):2311402. doi: 10.1080/28355245.2024.2311402.
4
Challenges to Exploring the Patient Perspective in Palliative Care Conversations: A Qualitative Study Among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Heart Failure Patients and Their Health Care Professionals.在姑息治疗对话中探索患者观点所面临的挑战:一项针对慢性阻塞性肺疾病和慢性心力衰竭患者及其医护人员的定性研究
Palliat Med Rep. 2024 Apr 5;5(1):150-161. doi: 10.1089/pmr.2023.0071. eCollection 2024.
5
Health literacy in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care: a narrative review and future directions.哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)护理中的健康素养:叙述性综述及未来方向。
Respir Res. 2022 Dec 19;23(1):361. doi: 10.1186/s12931-022-02290-5.
6
Knowledge and skills used for clinical decision-making on childbirth interventions: A qualitative study among midwives in the Netherlands.用于分娩干预临床决策的知识与技能:荷兰助产士的一项定性研究
Eur J Midwifery. 2022 Sep 1;6:56. doi: 10.18332/ejm/151653. eCollection 2022.
7
'A basic understanding'; evaluation of a blended training programme for healthcare providers in hospital-based palliative care to improve communication with patients with limited health literacy.“基本理解”:评估基于医院的姑息治疗中为医疗保健提供者提供的混合培训计划,以改善与健康素养有限的患者的沟通。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Aug 11;22(1):613. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03685-0.
8
How doctors manage conflicts with families of critically ill patients during conversations about end-of-life decisions in neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care.医生在新生儿、儿科和成人重症监护病房就临终决策进行沟通时,如何处理与病危患者家属之间的冲突。
Intensive Care Med. 2022 Jul;48(7):910-922. doi: 10.1007/s00134-022-06771-5. Epub 2022 Jun 30.
9
Towards an open and effective dialogue on complementary medicine in oncology: protocol of patient participatory study 'COMMON'.迈向肿瘤学中补充医学的开放和有效对话:患者参与性研究“COMMON”的方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Oct 20;11(10):e053005. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053005.
10
How doctors make themselves understood in primary care consultations: A mixed methods analysis of video data applying health literacy universal precautions.医生如何在基层医疗咨询中让患者理解:运用健康素养普遍预防措施对视频数据进行的混合方法分析。
PLoS One. 2021 Sep 21;16(9):e0257312. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257312. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
The Use of Expectancy and Empathy When Communicating With Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer; an Observational Study of Clinician-Patient Consultations.与晚期乳腺癌患者沟通时期望和同理心的运用:临床医患咨询的观察性研究
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Jul 17;10:464. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00464. eCollection 2019.
2
How do hospital-based nurses and physicians identify the palliative phase in their patients and what difficulties exist? A qualitative interview study.基于医院的护士和医生如何识别其患者的缓和阶段,以及存在哪些困难?一项定性访谈研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2019 Jul 9;18(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0439-0.
3
Towards appropriate information provision for and decision-making with patients with limited health literacy in hospital-based palliative care in Western countries: a scoping review into available communication strategies and tools for healthcare providers.在西方国家基于医院的姑息治疗中为健康素养有限的患者提供适当的信息和决策支持:针对医疗保健提供者可用的沟通策略和工具的范围综述。
BMC Palliat Care. 2019 Apr 12;18(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0421-x.
4
"How Much Time Do I Have?": Communicating Prognosis in the Era of Exceptional Responders.“我还有多少时间?”:在出现特殊反应者的时代传达预后信息
Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2018 May 23;38:787-794. doi: 10.1200/EDBK_201211.
5
Advance care planning for patients with chronic respiratory diseases: a systematic review of preferences and practices.慢性呼吸系统疾病患者的预先医疗照护计划:偏好与实践的系统评价。
Thorax. 2018 Mar;73(3):222-230. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-209806. Epub 2017 Nov 6.
6
How do patients experience caring? Scoping review.患者如何体验关怀?范围综述。
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Sep;100(9):1622-1633. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.029. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
7
Current status of accurate prognostic awareness in advanced/terminally ill cancer patients: Systematic review and meta-regression analysis.晚期/终末期癌症患者准确预后认知的现状:系统评价与Meta回归分析
Palliat Med. 2017 May;31(5):406-418. doi: 10.1177/0269216316663976. Epub 2016 Aug 4.
8
Palliative care in COPD: an unmet area for quality improvement.慢性阻塞性肺疾病的姑息治疗:一个有待改进的质量领域。
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015 Aug 6;10:1543-51. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S74641. eCollection 2015.
9
Dying in the hospital setting: A systematic review of quantitative studies identifying the elements of end-of-life care that patients and their families rank as being most important.在医院环境中离世:对定量研究的系统评价,确定患者及其家属认为最重要的临终关怀要素。
Palliat Med. 2015 Oct;29(9):774-96. doi: 10.1177/0269216315583032. Epub 2015 Apr 28.
10
Health literacy in Europe: comparative results of the European health literacy survey (HLS-EU).欧洲的健康素养:欧洲健康素养调查(HLS-EU)的比较结果。
Eur J Public Health. 2015 Dec;25(6):1053-8. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv043. Epub 2015 Apr 5.

与癌症或 COPD 终末期患者进行有限健康素养的工具性和情感性沟通。

Instrumental and affective communication with patients with limited health literacy in the palliative phase of cancer or COPD.

机构信息

Nivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Department of Tranzo Scientific Centre for Care and Well-being, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Palliat Care. 2020 Oct 7;19(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12904-020-00658-2.

DOI:10.1186/s12904-020-00658-2
PMID:33028308
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7542099/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients have a 'need to know' (instrumental need) and a 'need to feel known' (affective need). During consultations with patients with limited health literacy (LHL) in the palliative phase of their disease, both the instrumental and the affective communication skills of healthcare providers are important. The study aims to explore instrumental and affective communication between care providers and LHL patients in the palliative phase of COPD or cancer.

METHODS

In 2018, consultations between LHL patients in the palliative phase of cancer or COPD and their healthcare providers were video-recorded in four hospitals in the Netherlands. As there was no observation algorithm available for this setting, several items were created to parameterize healthcare providers' instrumental communication (seven items: understanding, patient priorities, medical status, treatment options, treatment consequences, prognosis, and information about emotional distress) and affective communication (six items: hope, support, reassurance, empathy, appreciation, and emotional coping). The degree of each item was recorded for each consultation, with relevant segments of the observation selected and transcribed to support the items.

RESULTS

Consultations between 17 care providers and 39 patients were video-recorded and analyzed. Care providers primarily used instrumental communication, most often by giving information about treatment options and assessing patients' care priorities. Care providers assessed patients' understanding of their disease less often. The patients' prognosis was not mentioned in half the consultations. Within the affective domain, the care providers did provide support for their patients; providing hope, reassurance, empathy, and appreciation and discussing emotional coping were observed less often.

CONCLUSIONS

Care providers used mostly instrumental communication, especially treatment information, in consultations with LHL patients in the palliative phase of cancer or COPD. Most care providers did not check if the patient understood the information, which is rather crucial, especially given patients' limited level of health literacy. Healthcare providers did provide support for patients, but other expressions of affective communication by care providers were less common. To adapt the communication to LHL patients in palliative care, care providers could be less wordy and reduce the amount of information, use 'teach-back' techniques and pay more attention to affective communication.

摘要

背景

患者有“知情权”(工具性需求)和“被了解感”(情感性需求)。在为处于疾病终末期且健康素养有限的患者进行诊疗时,医护人员的工具性和情感性沟通技巧都很重要。本研究旨在探索医护人员与处于终末期慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)或癌症的低健康素养患者之间的工具性和情感性沟通。

方法

2018 年,荷兰四家医院对处于癌症或 COPD 终末期且健康素养有限的患者与其医护人员的诊疗过程进行了视频录制。由于该环境下尚无观察算法,故创建了若干条目来对医护人员的工具性沟通(七项:理解、患者优先事项、病情、治疗选择、治疗后果、预后和情绪困扰信息)和情感性沟通(六项:希望、支持、保证、共情、欣赏和情绪应对)进行参数化处理。为每一次诊疗记录每项的程度,并选择相关的观察片段进行转录,以支持条目。

结果

共对 17 名医护人员与 39 名患者的 39 次诊疗进行了视频录制和分析。医护人员主要采用工具性沟通,最常提供的是关于治疗选择的信息,并评估患者的护理重点。医护人员较少评估患者对其疾病的理解程度。有一半的诊疗中未提及患者的预后。在情感领域,医护人员确实为患者提供了支持;提供希望、保证、共情、欣赏和讨论情绪应对的情况则较少见。

结论

医护人员在对癌症或 COPD 终末期且健康素养有限的患者进行诊疗时,主要使用工具性沟通,尤其是治疗信息。大多数医护人员并未检查患者是否理解了信息,而这一点至关重要,特别是考虑到患者有限的健康素养水平。医护人员确实为患者提供了支持,但医护人员较少进行其他情感性沟通表达。为了使沟通适应终末期的低健康素养患者,医护人员可以少说话,减少信息量,使用“回述”技巧,并更加关注情感性沟通。