Validity of a Patient Communication Scale

IF 1.5 Q2 COMMUNICATION Frontiers in Communication Pub Date : 2023-11-17 DOI:10.3389/fcomm.2023.1271649
J. Quinn, N. Khalid, Glenn Albright
{"title":"Validity of a Patient Communication Scale","authors":"J. Quinn, N. Khalid, Glenn Albright","doi":"10.3389/fcomm.2023.1271649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1960s, standardized patients (SPs) have been used to prepare medical students for clinical work for these patients provide a controlled domain for learners. Specifically, these type of formative experiences provide a low stakes environment for practice and feedback, thereby increasing learner comfort in communicating with patients. Communication is the cornerstone of patient care, and it is well-established as a core clinical competency for medical students by numerous medical boards, associations, and accreditation agencies. While methods for communication training are of paramount importance, no validated scales assess the impact of these trainings on patient-provider communication where measures are based on attitudinal constructs that predict behavior, such as self-efficacy and preparedness. Thus, the aim of this study is to validity of a Patient Communication Scale (PCS) using an online virtual role-play training simulation.To validate the scale, 117 medical students were administered the PCS survey before and after completing a professional development virtual role-play simulation where they practiced motivational interviewing skills, talking to a patient who insists on antibiotics for a viral infection.A confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor model based on the subscales of preparedness and self-efficacy. Factor loadings showed all items correlated highly with theoretical constructs (r ≥ 0.902, p < 0.001). The PCS had high internal consistency (α = 0.916). Because there is a lack of scales that have been used to assess medical student as well as medical practitioner patient communication capabilities, specifically their preparedness and self-efficacy, criterion-related validity was not assessed. Convergent, content and construct validity were established.The Patient Communication Scale appears to be a valid tool in measuring the impact of online patient-provider communication skills training and holds promise for assessing other delivery methods.","PeriodicalId":31739,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Communication","volume":"116 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1271649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the 1960s, standardized patients (SPs) have been used to prepare medical students for clinical work for these patients provide a controlled domain for learners. Specifically, these type of formative experiences provide a low stakes environment for practice and feedback, thereby increasing learner comfort in communicating with patients. Communication is the cornerstone of patient care, and it is well-established as a core clinical competency for medical students by numerous medical boards, associations, and accreditation agencies. While methods for communication training are of paramount importance, no validated scales assess the impact of these trainings on patient-provider communication where measures are based on attitudinal constructs that predict behavior, such as self-efficacy and preparedness. Thus, the aim of this study is to validity of a Patient Communication Scale (PCS) using an online virtual role-play training simulation.To validate the scale, 117 medical students were administered the PCS survey before and after completing a professional development virtual role-play simulation where they practiced motivational interviewing skills, talking to a patient who insists on antibiotics for a viral infection.A confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor model based on the subscales of preparedness and self-efficacy. Factor loadings showed all items correlated highly with theoretical constructs (r ≥ 0.902, p < 0.001). The PCS had high internal consistency (α = 0.916). Because there is a lack of scales that have been used to assess medical student as well as medical practitioner patient communication capabilities, specifically their preparedness and self-efficacy, criterion-related validity was not assessed. Convergent, content and construct validity were established.The Patient Communication Scale appears to be a valid tool in measuring the impact of online patient-provider communication skills training and holds promise for assessing other delivery methods.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者沟通量表的有效性
自 20 世纪 60 年代以来,标准化病人(SP)一直被用于帮助医科学生为临床工作做好准备,因为这些病人为学习者提供了一个可控领域。具体来说,这些类型的形成性经验为练习和反馈提供了一个低风险的环境,从而提高了学习者与病人沟通的舒适度。沟通是病人护理的基石,许多医学委员会、协会和认证机构都将其确立为医学生的核心临床能力。虽然沟通培训的方法至关重要,但目前还没有经过验证的量表来评估这些培训对医患沟通的影响,而这些量表是基于预测行为的态度结构,如自我效能和准备程度。为了验证该量表,117 名医科学生在完成职业发展虚拟角色扮演模拟之前和之后接受了 PCS 调查,他们在模拟中练习了动机面谈技巧,并与一名坚持使用抗生素治疗病毒感染的患者进行了交谈。因子载荷显示,所有项目与理论结构高度相关(r ≥ 0.902,p < 0.001)。PCS 具有较高的内部一致性(α = 0.916)。由于缺乏用于评估医学生和执业医师医患沟通能力的量表,特别是他们的准备程度和自我效能,因此未对标准相关效度进行评估。患者沟通量表似乎是衡量在线医患沟通技能培训效果的有效工具,并有望用于评估其他培训方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
284
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Causal inference of diachronic semantic maps from cross-linguistic synchronic polysemy data I'd rather be a cyborg than a celebrity: Black feminism in the digital music industry Feminist HCI and narratives of design semantics in DIY music hardware Designing understandable, action-oriented, and well-perceived earthquake risk maps—The Swiss case study Topic modeling three decades of climate change news in Denmark
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1