David B Feldman, Mark A O'Rourke, Benjamin W Corn, Matthew F Hudson, Naimik Patel, Rajiv Agarwal, Valerie L Fraser, Heidi Deininger, Lauren A Fowler, Marie A Bakitas, Robert A Krouse, Ishwaria M Subbiah
{"title":"开发临床医生医疗沟通自我效能(SEMC)测量工具。","authors":"David B Feldman, Mark A O'Rourke, Benjamin W Corn, Matthew F Hudson, Naimik Patel, Rajiv Agarwal, Valerie L Fraser, Heidi Deininger, Lauren A Fowler, Marie A Bakitas, Robert A Krouse, Ishwaria M Subbiah","doi":"10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Studies of clinician-patient communication have used varied, ad hoc measures for communication efficacy. We developed and validated the Self-Efficacy for Medical Communication (SEMC) scale as a standard, quantitative measure of clinician-reported skills in communicating difficult news.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using evidence-based scale development guidelines, we created two 16-item forms of the SEMC, one assessing communication with patients and one assessing communication with families. Clinicians providing oncological care in four organisations were invited to participate and provided consent. Participant demographics, responses to the SEMC items and responses to convergent and discriminant measures (those expected to relate strongly and weakly to the SEMC) were collected online. We performed analyses to determine the convergent and discriminant validity of the SEMC as well as its reliability and factor structure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 221 oncology clinicians (including physicians, residents, fellows, medical students, nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) participated. The patient and family forms both demonstrated high internal consistency reliability (alpha=0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and were strongly correlated with one another (r=0.95, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the SEMC measures a unitary construct (eigenvalue=9.0), and its higher mean correlation with convergent (r=0.46) than discriminant (r=0.22) measures further supported its validity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings support the SEMC's validity and reliability as a measure of clinician-rated communication skills regarding conducting difficult conversations with patients and families. It provides a useful standard tool for future research in oncology provider-patient serious illness communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":9136,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":"e2671-e2678"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a measure of clinicians' self-efficacy for medical communication (SEMC).\",\"authors\":\"David B Feldman, Mark A O'Rourke, Benjamin W Corn, Matthew F Hudson, Naimik Patel, Rajiv Agarwal, Valerie L Fraser, Heidi Deininger, Lauren A Fowler, Marie A Bakitas, Robert A Krouse, Ishwaria M Subbiah\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003593\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Studies of clinician-patient communication have used varied, ad hoc measures for communication efficacy. We developed and validated the Self-Efficacy for Medical Communication (SEMC) scale as a standard, quantitative measure of clinician-reported skills in communicating difficult news.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using evidence-based scale development guidelines, we created two 16-item forms of the SEMC, one assessing communication with patients and one assessing communication with families. Clinicians providing oncological care in four organisations were invited to participate and provided consent. Participant demographics, responses to the SEMC items and responses to convergent and discriminant measures (those expected to relate strongly and weakly to the SEMC) were collected online. We performed analyses to determine the convergent and discriminant validity of the SEMC as well as its reliability and factor structure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 221 oncology clinicians (including physicians, residents, fellows, medical students, nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) participated. The patient and family forms both demonstrated high internal consistency reliability (alpha=0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and were strongly correlated with one another (r=0.95, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the SEMC measures a unitary construct (eigenvalue=9.0), and its higher mean correlation with convergent (r=0.46) than discriminant (r=0.22) measures further supported its validity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings support the SEMC's validity and reliability as a measure of clinician-rated communication skills regarding conducting difficult conversations with patients and families. It provides a useful standard tool for future research in oncology provider-patient serious illness communication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e2671-e2678\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003593\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003593","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Development of a measure of clinicians' self-efficacy for medical communication (SEMC).
Objectives: Studies of clinician-patient communication have used varied, ad hoc measures for communication efficacy. We developed and validated the Self-Efficacy for Medical Communication (SEMC) scale as a standard, quantitative measure of clinician-reported skills in communicating difficult news.
Methods: Using evidence-based scale development guidelines, we created two 16-item forms of the SEMC, one assessing communication with patients and one assessing communication with families. Clinicians providing oncological care in four organisations were invited to participate and provided consent. Participant demographics, responses to the SEMC items and responses to convergent and discriminant measures (those expected to relate strongly and weakly to the SEMC) were collected online. We performed analyses to determine the convergent and discriminant validity of the SEMC as well as its reliability and factor structure.
Results: Overall, 221 oncology clinicians (including physicians, residents, fellows, medical students, nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) participated. The patient and family forms both demonstrated high internal consistency reliability (alpha=0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and were strongly correlated with one another (r=0.95, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the SEMC measures a unitary construct (eigenvalue=9.0), and its higher mean correlation with convergent (r=0.46) than discriminant (r=0.22) measures further supported its validity.
Conclusions: Our findings support the SEMC's validity and reliability as a measure of clinician-rated communication skills regarding conducting difficult conversations with patients and families. It provides a useful standard tool for future research in oncology provider-patient serious illness communication.
期刊介绍:
Published quarterly in print and continuously online, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care aims to connect many disciplines and specialties throughout the world by providing high quality, clinically relevant research, reviews, comment, information and news of international importance.
We hold an inclusive view of supportive and palliative care research and we are able to call on expertise to critique the whole range of methodologies within the subject, including those working in transitional research, clinical trials, epidemiology, behavioural sciences, ethics and health service research. Articles with relevance to clinical practice and clinical service development will be considered for publication.
In an international context, many different categories of clinician and healthcare workers do clinical work associated with palliative medicine, specialist or generalist palliative care, supportive care, psychosocial-oncology and end of life care. We wish to engage many specialties, not only those traditionally associated with supportive and palliative care. We hope to extend the readership to doctors, nurses, other healthcare workers and researchers in medical and surgical specialties, including but not limited to cardiology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, primary care, psychiatry, psychology, renal medicine, respiratory medicine.