任务分担和团队合作:临床医生对心脏病学中酒精筛查和简短干预的偏好。

IF 1.7 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Paul Welfordsson, Anna-Karin Danielsson, Caroline Björck, Bartosz Grzymala-Lubanski, Kristina Hambraeus, Ida Haugen Löfman, Frieder Braunschweig, Matthias Lidin, Sara Wallhed Finn
{"title":"任务分担和团队合作:临床医生对心脏病学中酒精筛查和简短干预的偏好。","authors":"Paul Welfordsson, Anna-Karin Danielsson, Caroline Björck, Bartosz Grzymala-Lubanski, Kristina Hambraeus, Ida Haugen Löfman, Frieder Braunschweig, Matthias Lidin, Sara Wallhed Finn","doi":"10.1186/s13104-025-07452-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate clinicians' preferences for alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 664 cardiology clinicians responded to a cross-sectional survey (30.9% response rate), including 55.1% nurses, 21.4% assistant nurses, 18.8% doctors, and 4.7% other clinical staff. Among these participants, 87.5% indicated that patients should be screened for alcohol use on cardiology wards, 79.8% in outpatient clinics, 49.1% in emergency departments, and 45.9% on coronary care units. Doctors and nurses were the preferred professions to be responsible for screening across all clinical contexts, while fewer respondents indicated that assistant nurses or physiotherapists should be responsible for screening (p < .001). Most participants (85.2%) indicated that patients should be screened in more than one clinical context and 84.6% indicated that more than one profession should be responsible for alcohol screening. Clinicians' preferred modality for assessing alcohol use was verbal screening (92% of participants), followed by questionnaires (53.5%), digital tools (28.5%), and alcohol biomarkers (22.1%, p < .001). Just over half of participants (58%) indicated that they would like to attend training on brief interventions. Findings suggest that task sharing, teamwork, and training may be effective strategies for implementation of alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":9234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Research Notes","volume":"18 1","pages":"373"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12398004/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Task sharing and teamwork: clinician preferences for alcohol screening and brief interventions in cardiology.\",\"authors\":\"Paul Welfordsson, Anna-Karin Danielsson, Caroline Björck, Bartosz Grzymala-Lubanski, Kristina Hambraeus, Ida Haugen Löfman, Frieder Braunschweig, Matthias Lidin, Sara Wallhed Finn\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13104-025-07452-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate clinicians' preferences for alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 664 cardiology clinicians responded to a cross-sectional survey (30.9% response rate), including 55.1% nurses, 21.4% assistant nurses, 18.8% doctors, and 4.7% other clinical staff. Among these participants, 87.5% indicated that patients should be screened for alcohol use on cardiology wards, 79.8% in outpatient clinics, 49.1% in emergency departments, and 45.9% on coronary care units. Doctors and nurses were the preferred professions to be responsible for screening across all clinical contexts, while fewer respondents indicated that assistant nurses or physiotherapists should be responsible for screening (p < .001). Most participants (85.2%) indicated that patients should be screened in more than one clinical context and 84.6% indicated that more than one profession should be responsible for alcohol screening. Clinicians' preferred modality for assessing alcohol use was verbal screening (92% of participants), followed by questionnaires (53.5%), digital tools (28.5%), and alcohol biomarkers (22.1%, p < .001). Just over half of participants (58%) indicated that they would like to attend training on brief interventions. Findings suggest that task sharing, teamwork, and training may be effective strategies for implementation of alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"373\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12398004/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-025-07452-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Research Notes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-025-07452-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨临床医生在临床心脏病学设置中对酒精筛查和简短干预的偏好。结果:共有664名心内科临床医生响应横断面调查,回复率为30.9%,其中护士55.1%,助理护士21.4%,医生18.8%,其他临床工作人员4.7%。在这些参与者中,87.5%的人表示应该在心脏病病房对患者进行酒精使用筛查,79.8%的人在门诊,49.1%的人在急诊科,45.9%的人在冠状动脉监护病房。医生和护士是在所有临床环境中负责筛查的首选职业,而较少的受访者表示助理护士或物理治疗师应负责筛查
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Task sharing and teamwork: clinician preferences for alcohol screening and brief interventions in cardiology.

Objective: To investigate clinicians' preferences for alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology settings.

Results: A total of 664 cardiology clinicians responded to a cross-sectional survey (30.9% response rate), including 55.1% nurses, 21.4% assistant nurses, 18.8% doctors, and 4.7% other clinical staff. Among these participants, 87.5% indicated that patients should be screened for alcohol use on cardiology wards, 79.8% in outpatient clinics, 49.1% in emergency departments, and 45.9% on coronary care units. Doctors and nurses were the preferred professions to be responsible for screening across all clinical contexts, while fewer respondents indicated that assistant nurses or physiotherapists should be responsible for screening (p < .001). Most participants (85.2%) indicated that patients should be screened in more than one clinical context and 84.6% indicated that more than one profession should be responsible for alcohol screening. Clinicians' preferred modality for assessing alcohol use was verbal screening (92% of participants), followed by questionnaires (53.5%), digital tools (28.5%), and alcohol biomarkers (22.1%, p < .001). Just over half of participants (58%) indicated that they would like to attend training on brief interventions. Findings suggest that task sharing, teamwork, and training may be effective strategies for implementation of alcohol screening and brief interventions in clinical cardiology.

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
BMC Research Notes
BMC Research Notes Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
363
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Research Notes publishes scientifically valid research outputs that cannot be considered as full research or methodology articles. We support the research community across all scientific and clinical disciplines by providing an open access forum for sharing data and useful information; this includes, but is not limited to, updates to previous work, additions to established methods, short publications, null results, research proposals and data management plans.
×
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