Mind the (knowledge) gap: The effect of a communication instrument on emergency department patients’ comprehension of and satisfaction with care

Simmons, Stefanie; Sharp, Brian; Fowler, Jennifer; Fowkes, Hope A. N.; Paz-Arabo, Patricia; Dilt-Skaggs, Mary Kate; Singal, Bonita; Carter, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.10.020

Cited by 19 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Leaver et al (2009) (2), lack of proper communication, different communication styles, distraction, fatigue and misinterpretation of communication symptoms are the most important barriers to proper communication among hospital staff that should be considered. Simmons et al (2015) (24) found that dialogue and discussion on ways to prevent injury to patients, is one of the most important priorities that should be considered at the emergency department.…”

Section: Estimated Marginal Meansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Improvement Priorities From the Perspective of Emergency Department Staff in Iran’s Hospitals

Majidi¹,

Nasiripour²

2016

Crit Care Nurs J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Estimated Marginal Meansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Improvement Priorities From the Perspective of Emergency Department Staff in Iran’s Hospitals

Majidi¹,

Nasiripour²

2016

Crit Care Nurs J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The validity of the intrinsic properties of the drug sub-section of the GASAC score was confirmed by a satisfactory Cronbach’s alpha coefficient 34 and a high rate of correctly classified patients. For external validity, the study also showed convergence with the Girerd score as well as with well-known determinants of adherence for chronic conditions such as DPC and satisfaction [17,30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Although some authors defined adherence “as the extent to which a patient’s behaviour (in terms of taking medication, following a diet, modifying habits, or attending clinics) coincides with medical or health advice” [4], there is still no method to measure adherence that includes all aspects of a patient’s behaviour after a consultation. There lacks a standardized tool that is well adapted to clinical research [29] and assessment of health-care quality [1,17], and none suitable for the context of AC [30,31]. The question of how best to measure adherence is still open [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Proposal for a Global Adherence Scale for Acute Conditions (GASAC): a prospective cohort study in two Emergency Departments

Sustersic

Gauchet

Duvert

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

4 Background: Adherence in the context of patients with acute conditions is a major public health issue. 5 It is neglected by the research community and no clinically validated generic scale exists to measure it. 6 Objective: To construct and validate a Global Adherence Scale usable in the context of Acute 7 Conditions (GASAC) that takes into account adherence both to advice and to all types of prescriptions 8 that the doctor may give. To measure adherence and to study its determinants. 9 Materials and method: We based the construction of the GASAC questionnaire on a theoretical 10 model and a literature search. Then, between 2013 and 2014, we validated it in a prospective 11 observational study in two hospital emergency departments. Patients were contacted by phone about 12 one week after their consultation to answer several questionnaires, including GASAC and the Girerd 13 self-administered questionnaire about medication adherence as a control.14 Results: GASAC consists of four adherence subscales: drug prescriptions; blood test/ radiography 15 prescriptions; lifestyle advice and follow-up instructions. An analysis of the 154 sets of answers from 16 patients showed that the GASAC drug subscale had satisfactory internal coherence (Cronbach's alpha 17 = 0.78) and was correlated with the Girerd score, as was GASAC as a whole (p<0.01)). The median 18 score was 0.93 IQR [0.78-1] for a maximum value of 1 (n = 154). In multivariate analysis, infection 19 was more conducive of good adherence (cut off at ≥ 0.8; n=115/154; 74.7% [67.0-81.3]) than trauma 20 (OR 3.69;). The Doctor-Patient Communication score (OR 1.06 by score point, CI 21 [1.02-1.10]) also influenced adherence.22 Conclusions: GASAC is a generic score to measure all dimensions of adherence in emergency 23 departments for clinical research and the evaluation of clinical practice. The level of adherence was 24 high for acute conditions and could be further improved by good Doctor-Patient Communication.

show abstract

“…The study failed to demonstrate this intervention improved either satisfaction or comprehension of instructions, although did demonstrate that comprehension was especially reduced in the elderly. 51 A review article by Engel et al highlighted that language complexity in common ED discharge instructions (9th-10th grade; age 14-15) exceeded prior recommendations to meet the needs of a diverse patient population (6th grade; age [11][12]. Pragmatic recommendations include verbal reinforcement of information, checking understanding, and practical demonstrations where appropriate.…”

Section: Information Provisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding team, interpersonal and situational factors is essential for routine communication with patients in the emergency department (ED): A scoping literature review and formation of the ‘T.IP.S’ conceptual framework

Graham

Smith

2016

Journal of Communication in Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Most patient-provider communication skills frameworks focus on interpersonal behaviours within the context of a single consultation. In contrast, Emergency Department (ED) patient encounters consist of many new interactions with different professionals over a short time period. Additionally, ED care often occurs in a chaotic, unpredictable, and overcrowded environment. While these factors are recognised to present a major challenge to effective patient-provider communication in the ED, there is no accepted framework to guide how professionals or teams should approach and optimise communication with patients in the ED. Objectives This review aims to identify the current literature relating to routine patient provider communication processes in the ED and synthesise a new framework to enhance understanding of routine patient-provider communication processes in the ED. Methods Searches of Scopus, Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL were conducted to identify literature written between 2000 and 2016 using the terms ((communication OR consultation OR health literacy) AND (patient) AND (emergency medicine OR emergency department)). Results Fifty-five relevant articles were selected for final inclusion. A qualitative synthesis was conducted and content interpreted as either facilitating factors or obstacles to routine ED communication were coded and grouped into three overarching

show abstract

Mind the (knowledge) gap: The effect of a communication instrument on emergency department patients’ comprehension of and satisfaction with care

Cited by 19 publications

References 17 publications

Performance Improvement Priorities From the Perspective of Emergency Department Staff in Iran’s Hospitals

Performance Improvement Priorities From the Perspective of Emergency Department Staff in Iran’s Hospitals

Proposal for a Global Adherence Scale for Acute Conditions (GASAC): a prospective cohort study in two Emergency Departments

Understanding team, interpersonal and situational factors is essential for routine communication with patients in the emergency department (ED): A scoping literature review and formation of the ‘T.IP.S’ conceptual framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About