Letter to the Editor: Critical need for effective communication skills education in nursing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Wei (2018) [1], state that specific communication problems were linked to 17.5% of all complaints, but in reality other categories, totalling 83.7% of all complaints, have a clear (verbal and non-verbal) communication component; uncaring attitudes (26.7%), unsatisfactory quality of treatment and competence (26.5%) and processes of care (13.0%).Highlighting this point are the examples given by patients in relation to complaints categorised as uncaring attitudes, included "displayed indifferent expressions, used unfriendly language tones, were impatient with patients' questions, or did not give thorough explanations when answering questions".The authors suggest theory-guided strategies to assist with nursing care.We advocate the need for this to be instilled in nursing education.Education providers for health professionals aim to improve communication skills through formal education [2e4].Wei et al. (2018) [1] state the Chinese curriculum for medicine focuses on science more than humane or caring qualities.Few education providers are able to effectively educate health professionals of the critical nature of communication for their future practice and work place requirements [5].In the United States, poor communication contributed to 1744 deaths over a five-year period [6].The United Kingdom Nation Health Service (NHS) are acutely aware of the issues with poor communication, commissioning a document, Improving Communication with Patients in the NHS.The document states that good communication, not only improves health outcomes, but could save the UK one billion pounds annually, challenging the position that communication is a "soft skill" [7].Good clear communication in nursing, specifically demonstrated as the successful ability to "receive, decode information effectivity, exhibiting different types of communication in different nursing contexts through visual, auditory and kinaesthetic modes" [[8], p. 51 2014], is the foundation of a vibrant, safe and effective healthcare system.Thus, student nurses require an evidence based, consistent communication educational approach.How communication is taught affects health professional's work place, patient lives and has financial implications [2,9,10].Previous studies have demonstrated the inconsistency in communication education [11e13].Common educational methods currently used, include simulation, role-play, videos, debriefing and reflection [4,10e12,14,15].One method that has proven to be effective is simulation, as this enhances performance in clinical practice [5].As well, there are a variety of validated communication assessment tools for health care.One example is The Calgary Cambridge Guide used by Ammentorp (2014) [16] for a programme to educate health employees, who had contact with patients.The tool measured communication ability, style and comprehension and could be applied to undergraduate nursing communication.Communication education is too important not to develop a consistent, evidenced based curriculum, employing rigorous assessments tools to ensure our future nursing practitioners are fully equipped with the communication skills required to support patients, families, and communities.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».