Conceptualizations of interprofessional communication in intensive care units: findings from a scoping review.

Q2 Social Sciences
Nicole L Johnson, Jane Moeckli
{"title":"Conceptualizations of interprofessional communication in intensive care units: findings from a scoping review.","authors":"Nicole L Johnson, Jane Moeckli","doi":"10.1080/17538068.2023.2297124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical errors in intensive care units (ICUs) are consistently attributed to communication errors. Despite its importance for patient safety and quality in critical care settings, few studies consider interprofessional communication as more than the basic exchange of information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a scoping review of interprofessional communication in ICUs to (1) characterize how communication is defined and measured and (2) identify contributions the field of health communication can make to team communication in ICUs. Through a series of queries in PubMed and Communication and Mass Media Complete databases, we identified and compared persistent gaps in how communication is framed and theorized in 28 publications from health services and 6 from social science outlets. We identified research priorities and suggested strategies for discussing communication more holistically in future health services research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>34 articles published from 1999 to 2021 were included. Six explicitly defined communication. Six were published in social science journals, but none were authored by a communication studies scholar. Half of the articles addressed communication as a transaction focused on information transfer, and the other half addressed communication as a process.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Methodological implications are identified with the intent to encourage future interdisciplinary collaboration for studying communication in ICUs. We discuss the importance of (1) using language to describe communication that facilitates interdisciplinary engagement, (2) prioritizing communication as a process and using qualitative methods to provide insight, and (3) engaging health communication theories and experts to assist in developing more fruitful research questions and designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":38052,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","volume":" ","pages":"130-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication in Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538068.2023.2297124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical errors in intensive care units (ICUs) are consistently attributed to communication errors. Despite its importance for patient safety and quality in critical care settings, few studies consider interprofessional communication as more than the basic exchange of information.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review of interprofessional communication in ICUs to (1) characterize how communication is defined and measured and (2) identify contributions the field of health communication can make to team communication in ICUs. Through a series of queries in PubMed and Communication and Mass Media Complete databases, we identified and compared persistent gaps in how communication is framed and theorized in 28 publications from health services and 6 from social science outlets. We identified research priorities and suggested strategies for discussing communication more holistically in future health services research.

Results: 34 articles published from 1999 to 2021 were included. Six explicitly defined communication. Six were published in social science journals, but none were authored by a communication studies scholar. Half of the articles addressed communication as a transaction focused on information transfer, and the other half addressed communication as a process.

Conclusions: Methodological implications are identified with the intent to encourage future interdisciplinary collaboration for studying communication in ICUs. We discuss the importance of (1) using language to describe communication that facilitates interdisciplinary engagement, (2) prioritizing communication as a process and using qualitative methods to provide insight, and (3) engaging health communication theories and experts to assist in developing more fruitful research questions and designs.

重症监护室专业间沟通的概念:范围界定审查的结果。
背景:重症监护室(ICU)中的临床错误一直被归咎于沟通错误。尽管沟通对于重症监护环境中的患者安全和质量非常重要,但很少有研究认为专业间沟通不仅仅是基本的信息交流:我们对重症监护病房的专业间沟通进行了一次范围界定研究,目的是:(1)描述如何定义和衡量沟通;(2)确定健康沟通领域可为重症监护病房的团队沟通做出的贡献。通过在 PubMed 和 Communication and Mass Media Complete 数据库中进行一系列查询,我们发现并比较了 28 篇卫生服务类出版物和 6 篇社会科学类出版物在沟通的框架和理论化方面持续存在的差距。我们确定了研究重点,并提出了在未来医疗服务研究中更全面地讨论传播问题的策略:我们收录了从 1999 年到 2021 年发表的 34 篇文章。其中六篇明确定义了沟通。六篇文章发表在社会科学期刊上,但没有一篇是由传播研究学者撰写的。半数文章将传播视为一种交易,侧重于信息传递,另一半文章将传播视为一种过程:我们确定了研究方法的意义,旨在鼓励今后在研究重症监护病房中的交流时开展跨学科合作。我们讨论了以下几点的重要性:(1)使用有利于跨学科参与的语言来描述沟通;(2)将沟通作为一个过程来优先考虑,并使用定性方法来提供见解;(3)让健康沟通理论和专家参与进来,以协助制定更有成效的研究问题和设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Communication in Healthcare
Journal of Communication in Healthcare Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信