“像个烫手山芋”:关于新生儿毒理学检测的临床医生与父母沟通的分解。

IF 2.1 Q1 Nursing
Gina Liu, Brianna J Wright, Leah N Schwartz, Ellis J Yeo, Sarah N Bernstein, Sharon Ostfeld-Johns, Davida M Schiff
{"title":"“像个烫手山芋”:关于新生儿毒理学检测的临床医生与父母沟通的分解。","authors":"Gina Liu, Brianna J Wright, Leah N Schwartz, Ellis J Yeo, Sarah N Bernstein, Sharon Ostfeld-Johns, Davida M Schiff","doi":"10.1542/hpeds.2024-007963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Examine the perspectives of newborn clinicians and parents on communication around newborn toxicology testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semistructured interviews from 2021 to 2022 with 15 newborn clinicians and 15 parents who experienced perinatal toxicology testing. Clinician interviews explored indications, perceptions of use, and attitudes toward parental consent for newborn toxicology testing. Parental interviews explored attitudes toward, knowledge of, and care team interactions related to perinatal toxicology testing. Researchers open coded transcripts for clinician and parent interviews separately to generate 2 codebooks. Transcripts were independently coded by 2 pairs of researchers. Codes involving communication and clinician-parent relationship from both groups were analyzed together using an inductive thematic analysis approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From both sets of interviews, we identified 4 themes: (1) lack of communication about the benefits and risks of newborn toxicology testing led to confusion and misperceptions about the purpose of testing among parents, (2) fear of damaging the clinician-parent relationship and discomfort discussing potential Child Protective Services involvement impacted clinician communication around testing, (3) both clinicians and parents expressed a desire for more transparent communication around newborn toxicology testing, and (4) participants suggested structured consent conversations and improved coordination across prenatal and perinatal care teams.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Newborn clinicians rarely discussed clinical benefits of newborn toxicology testing with parents. Both parents and clinicians offered suggestions for improving the transparency and structure of toxicology testing discussions.</p>","PeriodicalId":38180,"journal":{"name":"Hospital pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"334-341"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Like a Hot Potato\\\": Breakdown of Clinician-Parent Communication About Newborn Toxicology Testing.\",\"authors\":\"Gina Liu, Brianna J Wright, Leah N Schwartz, Ellis J Yeo, Sarah N Bernstein, Sharon Ostfeld-Johns, Davida M Schiff\",\"doi\":\"10.1542/hpeds.2024-007963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Examine the perspectives of newborn clinicians and parents on communication around newborn toxicology testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semistructured interviews from 2021 to 2022 with 15 newborn clinicians and 15 parents who experienced perinatal toxicology testing. Clinician interviews explored indications, perceptions of use, and attitudes toward parental consent for newborn toxicology testing. Parental interviews explored attitudes toward, knowledge of, and care team interactions related to perinatal toxicology testing. Researchers open coded transcripts for clinician and parent interviews separately to generate 2 codebooks. Transcripts were independently coded by 2 pairs of researchers. Codes involving communication and clinician-parent relationship from both groups were analyzed together using an inductive thematic analysis approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From both sets of interviews, we identified 4 themes: (1) lack of communication about the benefits and risks of newborn toxicology testing led to confusion and misperceptions about the purpose of testing among parents, (2) fear of damaging the clinician-parent relationship and discomfort discussing potential Child Protective Services involvement impacted clinician communication around testing, (3) both clinicians and parents expressed a desire for more transparent communication around newborn toxicology testing, and (4) participants suggested structured consent conversations and improved coordination across prenatal and perinatal care teams.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Newborn clinicians rarely discussed clinical benefits of newborn toxicology testing with parents. Both parents and clinicians offered suggestions for improving the transparency and structure of toxicology testing discussions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hospital pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"334-341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hospital pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2024-007963\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2024-007963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨新生儿临床医生和家长对新生儿毒理学检测沟通的看法。方法:从2021年到2022年,我们对15名新生儿临床医生和15名接受围产期毒理学检测的父母进行了半结构化访谈。临床医生访谈探讨了新生儿毒理学测试的适应症、使用观念和对父母同意的态度。家长访谈探讨了对围产期毒理学测试的态度、知识和护理团队互动。研究人员分别为临床医生和家长访谈打开编码转录本,生成2个编码本。转录本由两对研究人员独立编码。采用归纳主题分析方法,对两组患者涉及沟通和医患关系的编码进行分析。结果:从两组访谈中,我们确定了4个主题:(1)缺乏关于新生儿毒理学检测的益处和风险的沟通导致父母对检测目的的混淆和误解;(2)担心破坏临床医生与父母的关系以及讨论潜在的儿童保护服务的不适影响了临床医生关于检测的沟通;(3)临床医生和父母都表达了对新生儿毒理学检测更透明沟通的愿望。(4)参与者建议结构化的同意对话和改善产前和围产期护理团队的协调。结论:新生儿临床医生很少与父母讨论新生儿毒理学检测的临床益处。家长和临床医生都对提高毒理学测试讨论的透明度和结构提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"Like a Hot Potato": Breakdown of Clinician-Parent Communication About Newborn Toxicology Testing.

Objective: Examine the perspectives of newborn clinicians and parents on communication around newborn toxicology testing.

Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews from 2021 to 2022 with 15 newborn clinicians and 15 parents who experienced perinatal toxicology testing. Clinician interviews explored indications, perceptions of use, and attitudes toward parental consent for newborn toxicology testing. Parental interviews explored attitudes toward, knowledge of, and care team interactions related to perinatal toxicology testing. Researchers open coded transcripts for clinician and parent interviews separately to generate 2 codebooks. Transcripts were independently coded by 2 pairs of researchers. Codes involving communication and clinician-parent relationship from both groups were analyzed together using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

Results: From both sets of interviews, we identified 4 themes: (1) lack of communication about the benefits and risks of newborn toxicology testing led to confusion and misperceptions about the purpose of testing among parents, (2) fear of damaging the clinician-parent relationship and discomfort discussing potential Child Protective Services involvement impacted clinician communication around testing, (3) both clinicians and parents expressed a desire for more transparent communication around newborn toxicology testing, and (4) participants suggested structured consent conversations and improved coordination across prenatal and perinatal care teams.

Conclusion: Newborn clinicians rarely discussed clinical benefits of newborn toxicology testing with parents. Both parents and clinicians offered suggestions for improving the transparency and structure of toxicology testing discussions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hospital pediatrics
Hospital pediatrics Nursing-Pediatrics
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
204
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信