日本护士和护理人员在老年人对话偏好量表(DPSE)上的得分比较

H. Shimizu
{"title":"日本护士和护理人员在老年人对话偏好量表(DPSE)上的得分比较","authors":"H. Shimizu","doi":"10.15344/2394-4978/2020/328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compared nurses’ and care workers’ scores on the Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE) created from data from nursing students in Japan. For this forward-looking, quantitative, questionnairebased study, data collection was conducted from 2010 to 2012 with care seminar participants in Japan. Participants were nurses (n = 277; 36.96 ± 10.33 years old, males; 4.33% females; 95.66%) and care workers (n = 83; 40.52 ± 11.68 years old, males; 25.30% females; 74.69). The samples varied significantly in mean age (p < 0.05) and gender (p < 0.001). The number of years of experience was 139.94 for nurses with SD = 10.99 and 90.99 for care workers with SD = 45.44 (p < 0.001). Data were gathered using the 15-item Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE or Shimizu scale), which assesses nurses’ negative cognition and attitude tendencies during their conversations with elderly individuals [1]. The DPSE measures attributes and the four sub-concepts of bewilderment, anxiety, cognitive bias, and communication difficulty. Higher scores indicate more negative cognitions or attitudes (maximum score: 28). Data were descriptively analyzed using Pearson’s χ2 test and student’s t test of confirmatory factors. Nurses’ total scores (mean; 57.31, SD = 11.84) were not significantly different than care worker’s scores (mean; 57.58, SD = 12.25), indicating that nurses, and care workers had a similar view of communicating with older people. However, the sub-concept of cognitive bias was significantly lower for nurses, as they likely had higher levels of ageism (p < 0.10). Additionally, the communication difficulty sub-concept also was significantly higher for nurses, possibly because they had been caring for much older patients with more severe illnesses (p < 0.01).","PeriodicalId":91514,"journal":{"name":"International journal of nursing & clinical practices","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Japanese Nurses' and Care Workers' Scores on the Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE)\",\"authors\":\"H. Shimizu\",\"doi\":\"10.15344/2394-4978/2020/328\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study compared nurses’ and care workers’ scores on the Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE) created from data from nursing students in Japan. For this forward-looking, quantitative, questionnairebased study, data collection was conducted from 2010 to 2012 with care seminar participants in Japan. Participants were nurses (n = 277; 36.96 ± 10.33 years old, males; 4.33% females; 95.66%) and care workers (n = 83; 40.52 ± 11.68 years old, males; 25.30% females; 74.69). The samples varied significantly in mean age (p < 0.05) and gender (p < 0.001). The number of years of experience was 139.94 for nurses with SD = 10.99 and 90.99 for care workers with SD = 45.44 (p < 0.001). Data were gathered using the 15-item Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE or Shimizu scale), which assesses nurses’ negative cognition and attitude tendencies during their conversations with elderly individuals [1]. The DPSE measures attributes and the four sub-concepts of bewilderment, anxiety, cognitive bias, and communication difficulty. Higher scores indicate more negative cognitions or attitudes (maximum score: 28). Data were descriptively analyzed using Pearson’s χ2 test and student’s t test of confirmatory factors. Nurses’ total scores (mean; 57.31, SD = 11.84) were not significantly different than care worker’s scores (mean; 57.58, SD = 12.25), indicating that nurses, and care workers had a similar view of communicating with older people. However, the sub-concept of cognitive bias was significantly lower for nurses, as they likely had higher levels of ageism (p < 0.10). Additionally, the communication difficulty sub-concept also was significantly higher for nurses, possibly because they had been caring for much older patients with more severe illnesses (p < 0.01).\",\"PeriodicalId\":91514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of nursing & clinical practices\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of nursing & clinical practices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15344/2394-4978/2020/328\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of nursing & clinical practices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15344/2394-4978/2020/328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这项研究比较了护士和护理人员在老年人对话偏好量表(DPSE)上的得分,该量表是根据日本护理专业学生的数据创建的。对于这项前瞻性的、定量的、基于问卷的研究,从2010年到2012年对日本的护理研讨会参与者进行了数据收集。参与者为护士(n=277;36.96±10.33岁,男性;4.33%,女性;95.66%)和护理人员(n=83;40.52±11.68岁,男性,25.30%,女性;74.69)。样本的平均年龄(p<0.05)和性别(p<0.001)差异显著。SD=10.99的护士的工作年限为139.94年,SD=45.44的护理人员的工作年限(p<0.001)为90.99年使用15项老年人对话偏好量表(DPSE或清水量表)收集,该量表评估护士在与老年人对话过程中的负面认知和态度倾向[1]。DPSE测量困惑、焦虑、认知偏见和沟通困难这四个子概念的属性。得分越高,表示负面认知或态度越多(最高得分:28)。采用验证性因素的皮尔逊χ2检验和学生t检验对数据进行描述性分析。护士的总分(平均值;57.31,SD=11.84)与护理人员的得分(平均值:57.58,SD=12.25)没有显著差异,这表明护士和护理人员在与老年人沟通方面有着相似的看法。然而,护士的认知偏见子概念明显较低,因为他们可能具有更高的年龄歧视水平(p<0.10)。此外,护士的沟通困难子概念也明显较高,可能是因为他们一直在照顾患有更严重疾病的老年患者(p<0.01)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Japanese Nurses' and Care Workers' Scores on the Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE)
This study compared nurses’ and care workers’ scores on the Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE) created from data from nursing students in Japan. For this forward-looking, quantitative, questionnairebased study, data collection was conducted from 2010 to 2012 with care seminar participants in Japan. Participants were nurses (n = 277; 36.96 ± 10.33 years old, males; 4.33% females; 95.66%) and care workers (n = 83; 40.52 ± 11.68 years old, males; 25.30% females; 74.69). The samples varied significantly in mean age (p < 0.05) and gender (p < 0.001). The number of years of experience was 139.94 for nurses with SD = 10.99 and 90.99 for care workers with SD = 45.44 (p < 0.001). Data were gathered using the 15-item Dialogue Preference Scales for Elderly (DPSE or Shimizu scale), which assesses nurses’ negative cognition and attitude tendencies during their conversations with elderly individuals [1]. The DPSE measures attributes and the four sub-concepts of bewilderment, anxiety, cognitive bias, and communication difficulty. Higher scores indicate more negative cognitions or attitudes (maximum score: 28). Data were descriptively analyzed using Pearson’s χ2 test and student’s t test of confirmatory factors. Nurses’ total scores (mean; 57.31, SD = 11.84) were not significantly different than care worker’s scores (mean; 57.58, SD = 12.25), indicating that nurses, and care workers had a similar view of communicating with older people. However, the sub-concept of cognitive bias was significantly lower for nurses, as they likely had higher levels of ageism (p < 0.10). Additionally, the communication difficulty sub-concept also was significantly higher for nurses, possibly because they had been caring for much older patients with more severe illnesses (p < 0.01).
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
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