价值观澄清工作坊对天主教医院住院医师培训的影响

Q2 Medicine
Maryam Guiahi , Carrie Wilson , Emily Claymore , Kristin Simonson , Jody Steinauer
{"title":"价值观澄清工作坊对天主教医院住院医师培训的影响","authors":"Maryam Guiahi ,&nbsp;Carrie Wilson ,&nbsp;Emily Claymore ,&nbsp;Kristin Simonson ,&nbsp;Jody Steinauer","doi":"10.1016/j.conx.2021.100054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To evaluate if a values clarification workshop conducted at Catholic hospital training programs influenced obstetrics and gynecology residents' abortion attitudes.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Between 2018 and 2019, we provided a values clarification workshop focused on abortion care to 47 obstetrics and gynecology residents at five Catholic programs that do not provide abortion training. Participants received a pre-survey eliciting participant characteristics, and training experiences. On pre- and post-surveys, we asked participants to respond to abortion scenarios using a five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = strongly agree). We calculated descriptive frequencies, report the proportions agreeing with the statements (Likert ≥<!--> <!-->4) before and after the workshop, and compared median Likert responses using Wilcoxon matched pair test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Forty-one participants (87%) completed both surveys. Twelve (29%) reported Catholic religion, six (15%) reported their personal reproductive care views were in line with their institution, and five (12%) selected their program based on its religious affiliation. Three (9%) had experience with first-trimester abortion for nonmedical reasons, and 20 (49%) planned to provide such care after graduation. Both before and after the workshop, all participants could think of a justification why a patient with an undesired pregnancy would choose abortion. After the workshop, more residents were able to think of a justifiable reason for the following abortion-related scenarios: (1) patients declining post-abortal contraception (51% vs. 78%, p &lt; 0.001), (2) patients presenting for subsequent abortion (93% vs 95%, p = 0.01), and (3) patients presenting for second-trimester abortion (93% vs. 100%, p = 0.001). Many participants increased their Likert score when asked about acceptability of patients declining post-abortal contraception (n = 24, 59%), patients seeking a subsequent abortion (n = 15, 37%), and patients obtaining a second trimester abortion contraception (n = 11, 27%). Emotional and professional reactions to these scenarios were unchanged. After the workshop, residents were more likely to consider either financial inability (73% vs. 83%, p &lt; 0.01) or disruption to career or education (71% vs 80%, p &lt; 0.01) as morally acceptable reasons for requesting an abortion. For abortion for a patient who is financially unable to support their child, 12 (29%) increased their Likert score, 1 (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 28 (68%) had no change. For abortion for a patient whose career or education would be disrupted 13 (32%) increased their Likert score, one (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 27 (66%) had no change.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our values clarification workshop resulted in more residents at Catholic training programs endorsing accepting attitudes toward abortion patient scenarios. Values clarification exercises can be a useful tool for residents to discuss abortion care, especially when training is insufficient.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>Most obstetrics and gynecology residents at Catholic hospitals experience limited training in abortion care. A values clarification workshop conducted at such programs may result in increasing resident acceptance of abortion-related patient care scenarios and may help reduce abortion stigma.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10655,"journal":{"name":"Contraception: X","volume":"3 ","pages":"Article 100054"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.conx.2021.100054","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of a values clarification workshop on residents training at Catholic Hospital programs\",\"authors\":\"Maryam Guiahi ,&nbsp;Carrie Wilson ,&nbsp;Emily Claymore ,&nbsp;Kristin Simonson ,&nbsp;Jody Steinauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.conx.2021.100054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To evaluate if a values clarification workshop conducted at Catholic hospital training programs influenced obstetrics and gynecology residents' abortion attitudes.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Between 2018 and 2019, we provided a values clarification workshop focused on abortion care to 47 obstetrics and gynecology residents at five Catholic programs that do not provide abortion training. Participants received a pre-survey eliciting participant characteristics, and training experiences. On pre- and post-surveys, we asked participants to respond to abortion scenarios using a five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = strongly agree). We calculated descriptive frequencies, report the proportions agreeing with the statements (Likert ≥<!--> <!-->4) before and after the workshop, and compared median Likert responses using Wilcoxon matched pair test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Forty-one participants (87%) completed both surveys. Twelve (29%) reported Catholic religion, six (15%) reported their personal reproductive care views were in line with their institution, and five (12%) selected their program based on its religious affiliation. Three (9%) had experience with first-trimester abortion for nonmedical reasons, and 20 (49%) planned to provide such care after graduation. Both before and after the workshop, all participants could think of a justification why a patient with an undesired pregnancy would choose abortion. After the workshop, more residents were able to think of a justifiable reason for the following abortion-related scenarios: (1) patients declining post-abortal contraception (51% vs. 78%, p &lt; 0.001), (2) patients presenting for subsequent abortion (93% vs 95%, p = 0.01), and (3) patients presenting for second-trimester abortion (93% vs. 100%, p = 0.001). Many participants increased their Likert score when asked about acceptability of patients declining post-abortal contraception (n = 24, 59%), patients seeking a subsequent abortion (n = 15, 37%), and patients obtaining a second trimester abortion contraception (n = 11, 27%). Emotional and professional reactions to these scenarios were unchanged. After the workshop, residents were more likely to consider either financial inability (73% vs. 83%, p &lt; 0.01) or disruption to career or education (71% vs 80%, p &lt; 0.01) as morally acceptable reasons for requesting an abortion. For abortion for a patient who is financially unable to support their child, 12 (29%) increased their Likert score, 1 (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 28 (68%) had no change. For abortion for a patient whose career or education would be disrupted 13 (32%) increased their Likert score, one (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 27 (66%) had no change.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our values clarification workshop resulted in more residents at Catholic training programs endorsing accepting attitudes toward abortion patient scenarios. Values clarification exercises can be a useful tool for residents to discuss abortion care, especially when training is insufficient.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>Most obstetrics and gynecology residents at Catholic hospitals experience limited training in abortion care. A values clarification workshop conducted at such programs may result in increasing resident acceptance of abortion-related patient care scenarios and may help reduce abortion stigma.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception: X\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100054\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.conx.2021.100054\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception: X\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590151621000010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590151621000010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的评价天主教医院价值观澄清研讨会对妇产科住院医师堕胎态度的影响。研究设计在2018年至2019年期间,我们为五个不提供堕胎培训的天主教项目的47名妇产科住院医生提供了一个关于堕胎护理的价值观澄清研讨会。参与者接受了一项预先调查,以了解参与者的特征和培训经历。在预处理和post-surveys,我们要求参与者对堕胎的场景使用五点李克特量表(1 = 强烈反对,2 = 有点不同意3 = 既不同意也不反对,4 = 有点同意,5 = 强烈同意)。我们计算了描述频率,报告了研讨会前后符合陈述(Likert≥4)的比例,并使用Wilcoxon配对对检验比较了中位数Likert反应。结果41名参与者(87%)完成了两项调查。12人(29%)报告天主教信仰,6人(15%)报告他们的个人生殖保健观点与他们的机构一致,5人(12%)根据其宗教信仰选择他们的项目。3人(9%)有非医学原因的妊娠早期流产经验,20人(49%)计划在毕业后提供此类护理。在研讨会之前和之后,所有的参与者都能想出一个理由,为什么一个意外怀孕的病人会选择堕胎。研讨会结束后,更多的住院医师能够想到以下堕胎相关情况的合理原因:(1)患者在流产后拒绝避孕(51% vs. 78%, p < 0.001),(2)患者在随后流产(93% vs. 95%, p = 0.01),(3)患者在妊娠中期流产(93% vs. 100%, p = 0.001)。当被问及拒绝流产后避孕的患者(n = 24.59%)、寻求后续流产的患者(n = 15.37%)和获得中期流产避孕的患者(n = 11.27%)的可接受性时,许多参与者增加了他们的Likert评分。对这些情景的情绪和专业反应没有改变。讲习班结束后,居民更有可能考虑经济能力(73%对83%,p < 0.01)或职业或教育中断(71%对80%,p < 0.01)作为道德上可接受的要求堕胎的理由。对于经济上无法抚养孩子的堕胎患者,12人(29%)的Likert评分增加,1人(2%)评分降低,其余28人(68%)没有变化。对于因事业或教育可能中断而流产的患者,13人(32%)的Likert评分增加,1人(2%)的Likert评分降低,其余27人(66%)没有变化。结论:我们的价值观澄清研讨会使更多天主教培训项目的住院医师赞同接受堕胎患者的态度。价值观澄清练习可以是一个有用的工具,为居民讨论流产护理,特别是当培训不足。大多数天主教医院的妇产科住院医师在流产护理方面的培训有限。在这些项目中进行的价值观澄清研讨会可能会增加住院医生对堕胎相关患者护理方案的接受程度,并有助于减少堕胎的耻辱感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Influence of a values clarification workshop on residents training at Catholic Hospital programs

Influence of a values clarification workshop on residents training at Catholic Hospital programs

Objectives

To evaluate if a values clarification workshop conducted at Catholic hospital training programs influenced obstetrics and gynecology residents' abortion attitudes.

Study design

Between 2018 and 2019, we provided a values clarification workshop focused on abortion care to 47 obstetrics and gynecology residents at five Catholic programs that do not provide abortion training. Participants received a pre-survey eliciting participant characteristics, and training experiences. On pre- and post-surveys, we asked participants to respond to abortion scenarios using a five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = strongly agree). We calculated descriptive frequencies, report the proportions agreeing with the statements (Likert ≥ 4) before and after the workshop, and compared median Likert responses using Wilcoxon matched pair test.

Results

Forty-one participants (87%) completed both surveys. Twelve (29%) reported Catholic religion, six (15%) reported their personal reproductive care views were in line with their institution, and five (12%) selected their program based on its religious affiliation. Three (9%) had experience with first-trimester abortion for nonmedical reasons, and 20 (49%) planned to provide such care after graduation. Both before and after the workshop, all participants could think of a justification why a patient with an undesired pregnancy would choose abortion. After the workshop, more residents were able to think of a justifiable reason for the following abortion-related scenarios: (1) patients declining post-abortal contraception (51% vs. 78%, p < 0.001), (2) patients presenting for subsequent abortion (93% vs 95%, p = 0.01), and (3) patients presenting for second-trimester abortion (93% vs. 100%, p = 0.001). Many participants increased their Likert score when asked about acceptability of patients declining post-abortal contraception (n = 24, 59%), patients seeking a subsequent abortion (n = 15, 37%), and patients obtaining a second trimester abortion contraception (n = 11, 27%). Emotional and professional reactions to these scenarios were unchanged. After the workshop, residents were more likely to consider either financial inability (73% vs. 83%, p < 0.01) or disruption to career or education (71% vs 80%, p < 0.01) as morally acceptable reasons for requesting an abortion. For abortion for a patient who is financially unable to support their child, 12 (29%) increased their Likert score, 1 (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 28 (68%) had no change. For abortion for a patient whose career or education would be disrupted 13 (32%) increased their Likert score, one (2%) had a lower score and the remaining 27 (66%) had no change.

Conclusion

Our values clarification workshop resulted in more residents at Catholic training programs endorsing accepting attitudes toward abortion patient scenarios. Values clarification exercises can be a useful tool for residents to discuss abortion care, especially when training is insufficient.

Implications

Most obstetrics and gynecology residents at Catholic hospitals experience limited training in abortion care. A values clarification workshop conducted at such programs may result in increasing resident acceptance of abortion-related patient care scenarios and may help reduce abortion stigma.

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
Contraception: X
Contraception: X Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
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