Suppr超能文献

一项使用关键健康能力测试(CHC测试)对糖尿病教育者的关键健康能力进行的调查。

A survey on critical health competences among diabetes educators using the Critical Health Competence Test (CHC Test).

作者信息

Hecht Lars, Meyer Gabriele, Steckelberg Anke

机构信息

School of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health, University of Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Herdecke, Germany.

Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.

出版信息

BMC Med Educ. 2021 Feb 9;21(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02519-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Diabetes associations claim to have a patient-centered approach in diabetes care including shared decision-making (SDM). Diabetes educators are important healthcare professionals for implementing the concept of informed SDM in diabetes care. They need critical health competences (CHC) in order to provide evidence-based information and to support patients in understanding the risks of the disease and also the possible benefits or harm of the healthcare options. Therefore, we surveyed the CHC of diabetes educators.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional survey using the validated Critical Health Competences (CHC) Test to measure CHC of certified diabetes educators and trainees in Germany. Diabetes educators were approached via newsletter, mailing lists or in person during the conference of the German Diabetes Association. Trainees were approached during their training sessions. We applied scenario 1 of the CHC test, which comprises 17 items with open-ended and multiple-choice questions. Mean person parameters with a range from 0 to 1000 were calculated to assess the levels of critical health competences and a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to determine correlations between sociodemographic variables and levels of CHC.

RESULTS

A total of 325 participants, mean age 38.6 (±11.1) years, completed the CHC test; n = 174 (55.5%) were certified diabetes educators and n = 151 (46.5%) were trainees. The participants achieved a mean score of 409.84 person parameters (±88.10) (scale from 0 to 1000). A statistically significant association was found only between the level of education and the level of CHC (b = 0.221; p-value 0.002). Participants with grammar school education achieved higher mean scores compared to participants with secondary school education (432.88 ± 77.72 vs. 396.45 ± 85.95; mean difference 36.42 ± 9.29; 95%CI 18.15 to 54.71; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Diabetes educators achieved low competence scores and it can be assumed that they do not have sufficient CHC to conduct consultations based on the SDM principles. Poor CHC among healthcare providers are a major barrier for the implementation of SDM. Core concepts of evidence-based medicine should be implemented into the curricula for diabetes educators in order to increase their levels of CHC.

摘要

背景

糖尿病协会宣称在糖尿病护理中采用以患者为中心的方法,包括共同决策(SDM)。糖尿病教育工作者是在糖尿病护理中实施明智的共同决策概念的重要医疗保健专业人员。他们需要关键健康能力(CHC),以便提供循证信息,并支持患者理解疾病风险以及医疗保健选择可能带来的益处或危害。因此,我们对糖尿病教育工作者的关键健康能力进行了调查。

方法

我们使用经过验证的关键健康能力(CHC)测试进行了一项横断面调查,以测量德国认证糖尿病教育工作者和学员的关键健康能力。通过时事通讯、邮件列表或在德国糖尿病协会会议期间亲自联系糖尿病教育工作者。在培训期间联系学员。我们应用了CHC测试的情景1,其中包括17个开放式和多项选择题。计算了范围从0到1000的平均个人参数,以评估关键健康能力水平,并进行了多元线性回归分析,以确定社会人口统计学变量与关键健康能力水平之间的相关性。

结果

共有345名参与者(平均年龄38.6(±11.1)岁)完成了CHC测试;n = 174(55.5%)为认证糖尿病教育工作者,n = 151(46.5%)为学员。参与者的平均得分是409.84个人参数(±88.10)(范围从0到1000)。仅在教育水平与关键健康能力水平之间发现了统计学上的显著关联(b = 0.221;p值0.002)。与接受中学教育的参与者相比,接受文法学校教育的参与者获得了更高的平均得分(432.88±77.72对396.45±85.95;平均差异36.42±9.29;95%CI 18.15至54.71;p < 0.0001)。

结论

糖尿病教育工作者的能力得分较低,可以假设他们没有足够的关键健康能力来基于共同决策原则进行咨询。医疗保健提供者的关键健康能力较差是实施共同决策的主要障碍。循证医学的核心概念应纳入糖尿病教育工作者的课程中,以提高他们的关键健康能力水平。

相似文献

3
5
Qualitative study of social and healthcare educators' perceptions of their competence in education.
Health Soc Care Community. 2019 Nov;27(6):1555-1563. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12827. Epub 2019 Aug 27.
6
How to measure critical health competences: development and validation of the Critical Health Competence Test (CHC Test).
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Mar;14(1):11-22. doi: 10.1007/s10459-007-9083-1. Epub 2007 Sep 28.
7
Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694.
8
The need for a community diabetes education curriculum for healthcare professionals.
J Contin Educ Nurs. 2007 Sep-Oct;38(5):227-31. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20070901-07.
10
The 2017 Diabetes Educator and the Diabetes Self-Management Education National Practice Survey.
Diabetes Educ. 2018 Jun;44(3):260-268. doi: 10.1177/0145721718765446. Epub 2018 Mar 28.

本文引用的文献

1
4
How contextual issues can distort shared decision making.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2016 Dec;118-119:17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2016.10.002. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
6
Shared decision making in endocrinology: present and future directions.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016 Aug;4(8):706-716. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00468-4. Epub 2016 Feb 23.
7
Barriers to evidence-based medicine: a systematic review.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;20(6):793-802. doi: 10.1111/jep.12222. Epub 2014 Aug 18.
10
Tools to assess evidence-based practice behaviour among healthcare professionals.
Evid Based Med. 2013 Aug;18(4):129-38. doi: 10.1136/eb-2012-100969. Epub 2013 Jan 24.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验