Healthcare Professionals' Emotions of Distance and Connection When Dealing With Patients' Vaccine Hesitancy: Interaction Styles, Values, and Implications.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Emeline Brosset, Emma Anderson, Amanda Garrison, Dawn Holford, Harriet Fisher, Patrick Peretti-Watel, Stephan Lewandowsky, Pierre Verger
{"title":"Healthcare Professionals' Emotions of Distance and Connection When Dealing With Patients' Vaccine Hesitancy: Interaction Styles, Values, and Implications.","authors":"Emeline Brosset, Emma Anderson, Amanda Garrison, Dawn Holford, Harriet Fisher, Patrick Peretti-Watel, Stephan Lewandowsky, Pierre Verger","doi":"10.1177/10497323251320921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a primary role in the delivery of population-based vaccination programs. Their emotional well-being can influence the quality of their relationships with patients and generally the outcome of their consultations. This qualitative study sought to identify the types of emotions that HCPs feel during conversations with vaccine-hesitant patients and their styles of interaction. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and November 2022 with 41 HCPs (mainly general practitioners and nurses) responsible for vaccinating patients: 23 in England and 18 in France. Framework analysis showed that participants reported numerous emotions, some associated with connection to patients (such as self-confidence and satisfaction) and others with distance (including anger, frustration, unease, and exhaustion). We identified four clusters of emotions reported together when reflecting on interactions with vaccine-hesitant patients: \"self-confidence and emotional empathy\" (satisfaction, sadness regarding the patient's situation); \"anxiety and insecurity\" (doubts about skills, concern for the patients); \"exhaustion and weariness\" (feeling of incompetence, nervousness); and \"discredit and frustration\" (feeling discredited, anger). Three styles of interaction were identified: most HCPs reassured and encouraged patients to get vaccinated (\"patient-centered\" style), some sought to convince them (\"adamant\" style), and some to inform them without discussion (\"detached\" style). In our study, HCPs describing a patient-centered interaction style emphasized emotions of connection more than of distance in their discourse, in contrast to those describing an adamant or detached style. Our results suggest that training programs offered to HCPs involved in vaccination discussions should consider the importance of emotions associated with vaccine discussions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323251320921"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323251320921","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a primary role in the delivery of population-based vaccination programs. Their emotional well-being can influence the quality of their relationships with patients and generally the outcome of their consultations. This qualitative study sought to identify the types of emotions that HCPs feel during conversations with vaccine-hesitant patients and their styles of interaction. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June and November 2022 with 41 HCPs (mainly general practitioners and nurses) responsible for vaccinating patients: 23 in England and 18 in France. Framework analysis showed that participants reported numerous emotions, some associated with connection to patients (such as self-confidence and satisfaction) and others with distance (including anger, frustration, unease, and exhaustion). We identified four clusters of emotions reported together when reflecting on interactions with vaccine-hesitant patients: "self-confidence and emotional empathy" (satisfaction, sadness regarding the patient's situation); "anxiety and insecurity" (doubts about skills, concern for the patients); "exhaustion and weariness" (feeling of incompetence, nervousness); and "discredit and frustration" (feeling discredited, anger). Three styles of interaction were identified: most HCPs reassured and encouraged patients to get vaccinated ("patient-centered" style), some sought to convince them ("adamant" style), and some to inform them without discussion ("detached" style). In our study, HCPs describing a patient-centered interaction style emphasized emotions of connection more than of distance in their discourse, in contrast to those describing an adamant or detached style. Our results suggest that training programs offered to HCPs involved in vaccination discussions should consider the importance of emotions associated with vaccine discussions.

医疗保健专业人员在处理患者疫苗犹豫时的距离和联系情绪:互动方式、价值观和含义。
卫生保健专业人员(HCPs)在提供以人群为基础的疫苗接种计划中发挥主要作用。他们的情绪健康可以影响他们与病人关系的质量,通常会影响他们的咨询结果。本定性研究旨在确定医护人员在与疫苗犹豫患者交谈时所感受到的情绪类型及其互动方式。在2022年6月至11月期间,对41名负责为患者接种疫苗的医护人员(主要是全科医生和护士)进行了半结构化访谈:23名在英格兰,18名在法国。框架分析显示,参与者报告了许多情绪,一些与与患者的联系有关(如自信和满意度),另一些与距离有关(包括愤怒、沮丧、不安和疲惫)。在反思与疫苗犹豫患者的互动时,我们确定了四组一起报告的情绪:“自信和情感共鸣”(对患者情况的满意,悲伤);“焦虑和不安全感”(对技能的怀疑,对病人的担忧);“疲惫不堪”(无能、紧张的感觉);还有“名誉扫地和沮丧”(感觉名誉扫地,愤怒)。确定了三种互动方式:大多数HCPs安慰并鼓励患者接种疫苗(“以患者为中心”的方式),一些试图说服他们(“坚定”的方式),一些不经讨论就告知他们(“超然”的方式)。在我们的研究中,描述以患者为中心的互动风格的医护人员在他们的话语中强调联系的情感多于距离,与那些描述坚定或超然风格的人形成对比。我们的研究结果表明,为参与疫苗接种讨论的医护人员提供的培训计划应考虑与疫苗讨论相关的情绪的重要性。
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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.
×
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