Hurissa Bekana Fekecha, Koricha Zewdie Birhanu, Dadi Lelisa Sena
School of Midwifery, Institute of Health, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Faculty of Public Health, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Front Psychol. 2023 May 22;14:1091605. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1091605. eCollection 2023.
Empathy has deteriorated throughout clinical training and medical practice, and little is known about the effect of empathy training on the empathy level of healthcare providers. To address this gap, we assessed the effect of empathy training on the empathy level of healthcare providers in Ethiopia.
A cluster randomized controlled trial study design was conducted from 20 December 2021 to 20 March 2022. The empathy training intervention was conducted for three consecutive days.
The study was conducted in five fistula treatment centers in Ethiopia.
The participants were all randomly selected healthcare providers.
Total mean score, percentage changes, and Cohen's effect size were computed. A linear mixed effects model and independent -test were used for data analysis.
A majority of the study participants were nurses in the profession, married, and first-degree holders. There was no statistically significant difference in the baseline empathy score of the intervention arm across their socio-demographic features. At the baseline, the mean empathy scores of the control and intervention arms were 102.10 ± 15.38 and 101.13 ± 17.67, respectively. The effect of empathy training on the total mean score changes of empathy of the intervention arm compared to the control arm at each follow-up time had a statistically significant difference. After a week, a month, and three months of post-intervention, the total mean empathy scores between the intervention and control arms were as follows: (intervention 112.65 ± 18.99, control 102.85 ± 15.65, = 0.55, = 0.03); (intervention 109.01 ± 17.79, control 100.52 ± 12.57, d = 0.53, = 0.034); and (intervention 106.28 ± 16.24, control 96.58 ± 14.69, = 0.60, = 0.016) with the overall percentage changes of 11, 8, and 5% from the baseline scores, respectively.
In this trial, the empathy training intervention was found to have more than a medium effect size. However, over the follow-up intervals, there was a decreasing trend in the total mean empathy scores of healthcare providers; suggesting that there should be continued empathy training and integration of it into educational and training curriculums to enhance and sustain the empathy of healthcare providers.: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry: http://www.edctp.org/panafrican-clinical-trials-registry or https://pactr.samrc.ac.za, PACTR202112564898934.
在整个临床培训和医疗实践过程中,同理心已经出现退化,而关于同理心培训对医疗服务提供者同理心水平的影响,我们所知甚少。为填补这一空白,我们评估了同理心培训对埃塞俄比亚医疗服务提供者同理心水平的影响。
于2021年12月20日至2022年3月20日开展了一项整群随机对照试验研究设计。同理心培训干预连续进行了三天。
该研究在埃塞俄比亚的五个瘘管治疗中心进行。
参与者均为随机挑选的医疗服务提供者。
计算总平均分、百分比变化和科恩效应量。采用线性混合效应模型和独立样本t检验进行数据分析。
大部分研究参与者是在职护士,已婚,拥有学士学位。干预组的基线同理心得分在其社会人口学特征方面无统计学显著差异。基线时,对照组和干预组的平均同理心得分分别为102.10±15.38和101.13±17.67。与对照组相比,同理心培训对干预组在每次随访时同理心总平均分变化的影响具有统计学显著差异。干预后一周、一个月和三个月,干预组与对照组之间的总平均同理心得分如下:(干预组112.65±18.99,对照组102.85±15.65,d=0.55,P=0.03);(干预组109.01±17.79,对照组100.52±12.57,d=0.53,P=0.034);以及(干预组106.28±16.24,对照组96.58±14.69,d=0.60,P=0.016),相对于基线得分的总体百分比变化分别为11%、8%和5%。
在本试验中,发现同理心培训干预的效应量超过中等水平。然而,在随访期间,医疗服务提供者的总平均同理心得分呈下降趋势;这表明应持续进行同理心培训并将其纳入教育和培训课程,以增强并维持医疗服务提供者的同理心。泛非临床试验注册中心:http://www.edctp.org/panafrican-clinical-trials-registry 或 https://pactr.samrc.ac.za,PACTR202112564898934 。