Study on the Discrepancy in Responses Given by Patients to Questions Regarding Subjective Symptoms

H. Hashimoto, Masayo Tanaka, Tadashi Oyake, T. Gomi, T. Ikeda, Masanori Yoshida, T. Fujimoto, M. Umezu, K. Nagashima, T. Fujita, M. Fujii, Y. Matsumoto, M. Fukuoka, M. Matsumoto, M. Ishi
{"title":"Study on the Discrepancy in Responses Given by Patients to Questions Regarding Subjective Symptoms","authors":"H. Hashimoto, Masayo Tanaka, Tadashi Oyake, T. Gomi, T. Ikeda, Masanori Yoshida, T. Fujimoto, M. Umezu, K. Nagashima, T. Fujita, M. Fujii, Y. Matsumoto, M. Fukuoka, M. Matsumoto, M. Ishi","doi":"10.5649/JJPHCS1975.26.52","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A cross-sectional study was conducted using the data obtained from a QOL study of Carvedilol to ascertain how the patients' answers on subjective symptoms change depending on how the questions were asked and who asked them. The patients in the present study received Carvedilol for six months, and were then questioned about six subjective symptoms (headache, dull headache, dizziness, palpitation, stiff shoulder, and malaise) by both physicians and pharmacists. The physicians mainly asked patients about the severity of each symptom, whereas the pharmacists asked about the frequency of each symptom. The results showed a discrepancy between the answers given to physicians and those given to pharmacists. The factors associated with the discrepancies in the answers included age, employment and standard of living. The results of the present study suggest that, in order to gather information about subjective symptoms from patients, it is necessary to consider the following factors: how patients are questioned, how they can answer the questions, how much time is spent with patients, and how to should patient privacy be protected.","PeriodicalId":14621,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Hospital Pharmacy","volume":"23 1","pages":"52-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5649/JJPHCS1975.26.52","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

A cross-sectional study was conducted using the data obtained from a QOL study of Carvedilol to ascertain how the patients' answers on subjective symptoms change depending on how the questions were asked and who asked them. The patients in the present study received Carvedilol for six months, and were then questioned about six subjective symptoms (headache, dull headache, dizziness, palpitation, stiff shoulder, and malaise) by both physicians and pharmacists. The physicians mainly asked patients about the severity of each symptom, whereas the pharmacists asked about the frequency of each symptom. The results showed a discrepancy between the answers given to physicians and those given to pharmacists. The factors associated with the discrepancies in the answers included age, employment and standard of living. The results of the present study suggest that, in order to gather information about subjective symptoms from patients, it is necessary to consider the following factors: how patients are questioned, how they can answer the questions, how much time is spent with patients, and how to should patient privacy be protected.
患者对主观症状问题回答差异的研究
利用卡维地洛生活质量研究获得的数据进行了一项横断面研究,以确定患者对主观症状的回答如何随着提问方式和提问人的变化而变化。在本研究中,患者服用卡维地洛6个月,然后由医生和药剂师询问6种主观症状(头痛、钝性头痛、头晕、心悸、肩僵和不适)。医生主要询问患者各症状的严重程度,而药剂师主要询问患者各症状出现的频率。结果显示,给医生的答案和给药剂师的答案存在差异。与答案差异相关的因素包括年龄、就业和生活水平。本研究的结果表明,为了收集患者的主观症状信息,有必要考虑以下因素:患者如何被询问,他们如何回答问题,花多少时间与患者在一起,以及如何保护患者的隐私。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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