A survey on the attitudinal differences between acute and community settings

Cael Field
{"title":"A survey on the attitudinal differences between acute and community settings","authors":"Cael Field","doi":"10.29390/cjrt-2022-031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction While challenges facing community and acute care practitioners have been studied elsewhere, this is not the case for respiratory therapists (RTs). This study aimed to examine attitudinal differences amongst RTs in British Columbia regarding challenges faced by acute and community settings. Methods A 40-item anonymous online survey was sent to members of the British Columbia Society or Respiratory Therapists. Of the 40 questions, 11 were relevant to the study’s aim. Results Of 1024 invitations, 197 (19.2%) responded. One-hundred and seventeen (59.4%) self-identified as working in acute care settings, 53 (26.9%) in community settings, and 27 (13.7%) as “other”. Stress- and interpersonal-related challenges showed statistically significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) based on work setting. Acute care had the highest percentage of responses for challenges related to technology, stress, inter-professional collaboration, and training. Community settings had the highest percentage in challenges related to independence and education. Both being equal received the highest percentage in challenges related to problem-solving, interpersonal, communication, and resource management. Discussion While attitudinal differences exist, they are not extreme. It did not appear that respondents’ primary motivation was to vote along “party lines”. Conclusions The setting an RT works in can influence attitudes related to stress and interpersonal challenges. Despite this, one setting is not universally more challenging. Acute care settings can have greater technological, inter-professional, and training-related challenges. Community settings can have greater independence and education-related challenges. Both settings can provide similar challenges with problem-solving, communication, and resource management.","PeriodicalId":9533,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR","volume":"1 1","pages":"146 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29390/cjrt-2022-031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction While challenges facing community and acute care practitioners have been studied elsewhere, this is not the case for respiratory therapists (RTs). This study aimed to examine attitudinal differences amongst RTs in British Columbia regarding challenges faced by acute and community settings. Methods A 40-item anonymous online survey was sent to members of the British Columbia Society or Respiratory Therapists. Of the 40 questions, 11 were relevant to the study’s aim. Results Of 1024 invitations, 197 (19.2%) responded. One-hundred and seventeen (59.4%) self-identified as working in acute care settings, 53 (26.9%) in community settings, and 27 (13.7%) as “other”. Stress- and interpersonal-related challenges showed statistically significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) based on work setting. Acute care had the highest percentage of responses for challenges related to technology, stress, inter-professional collaboration, and training. Community settings had the highest percentage in challenges related to independence and education. Both being equal received the highest percentage in challenges related to problem-solving, interpersonal, communication, and resource management. Discussion While attitudinal differences exist, they are not extreme. It did not appear that respondents’ primary motivation was to vote along “party lines”. Conclusions The setting an RT works in can influence attitudes related to stress and interpersonal challenges. Despite this, one setting is not universally more challenging. Acute care settings can have greater technological, inter-professional, and training-related challenges. Community settings can have greater independence and education-related challenges. Both settings can provide similar challenges with problem-solving, communication, and resource management.
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
急性环境与社区环境态度差异调查
虽然社区和急症护理从业者面临的挑战已经在其他地方进行了研究,但呼吸治疗师(RTs)的情况并非如此。本研究旨在考察不列颠哥伦比亚省RTs在急性和社区环境中所面临的挑战的态度差异。方法向不列颠哥伦比亚省呼吸治疗师协会会员发送40项匿名在线调查。在40个问题中,有11个与研究目的相关。结果在1024份邀请中,197份(19.2%)得到回应。117人(59.4%)自认为在急症护理机构工作,53人(26.9%)在社区环境中工作,27人(13.7%)为“其他”。压力相关挑战和人际相关挑战在不同工作环境中的差异有统计学意义(P≤0.05)。急症护理对与技术、压力、跨专业合作和培训相关的挑战的回应比例最高。社区环境在与独立和教育相关的挑战中所占比例最高。在解决问题、人际关系、沟通和资源管理方面的挑战中,两者的比例都是最高的。态度上的差异虽然存在,但并不极端。调查显示,受访者的主要动机并不是按照“党派路线”投票。结论RT工作环境对压力态度和人际挑战有影响。尽管如此,并不是所有的场景都更具挑战性。急性护理环境可能有更大的技术、跨专业和培训相关的挑战。社区环境可能具有更大的独立性和与教育相关的挑战。这两种设置在解决问题、沟通和资源管理方面都会带来类似的挑战。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A cross-sectional survey on the effects of ambient temperature and humidity on health outcomes in individuals with chronic respiratory disease Impact of telephone follow-up on COPD outcomes in pulmonary rehabilitation patients: A randomized clinical trial A survey on the attitudinal differences between acute and community settings Strategies to achieve adherence to prone positioning in awake COVID-19 patients with high-flow nasal oxygen. A case series Winning Posters from the Canadian Society of Respiratory Therapists 2022 Annual Conference
×
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