澳大利亚医护人员对与心脏病患者讨论性活动和亲密关系的看法:一项定性研究

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Australian journal of primary health Pub Date : 2023-12-12 DOI:10.1071/py23119
Claire Moran, Kara Lilly, Anthony Leo Walsh, Rachelle Foreman, Jane Taylor
{"title":"澳大利亚医护人员对与心脏病患者讨论性活动和亲密关系的看法:一项定性研究","authors":"Claire Moran, Kara Lilly, Anthony Leo Walsh, Rachelle Foreman, Jane Taylor","doi":"10.1071/py23119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong> Background</strong><p>Sexual activity and intimacy contribute to wellbeing throughout adult life, including after a heart attack. Providing support and information about sexual activity and intimacy after a heart attack is recognised as part of a comprehensive approach to cardiac rehabilitation. Previous research shows that patients expect health professionals to initiate discussions about sexual activity and intimacy, but that this seldom occurs.</p><strong> Methods</strong><p>Drawing on qualitative survey responses from a range of Australian health professionals working in cardiac care and rehabilitation, this research examined their perspectives on discussing sexual activity and intimacy with their patients, and patients’ partners. Using a social constructionist approach, thematic analysis was used to identify themes expressed by participants.</p><strong> Results</strong><p>Discussions about sexual activity and intimacy after heart attack were perceived as nebulous and taboo. The predominance of an illness – rather than wellness – framing of these discussions and a tendency for health professionals to make judgement calls contributed to discussions not occurring. Health professionals also identified a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural obstacles to discussions, including embarrassment, fear of patients’ embarrassment, a lack of role clarity, the absence of a clear protocol or training to guide practice, and a lack of time, privacy and patient resources.</p><strong> Conclusions</strong><p>Such discussions require normalisation, careful timing, sufficient time and adequate privacy. Staff training, a protocol and appropriate patient resources are needed to support health professionals to initiate discussions. Further research is required that investigates the impact of specific resources and training on health professionals’ practice and patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":8651,"journal":{"name":"Australian journal of primary health","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Australian health professionals’ perspectives on discussing sexual activity and intimacy with people who have had a heart attack: a qualitative study\",\"authors\":\"Claire Moran, Kara Lilly, Anthony Leo Walsh, Rachelle Foreman, Jane Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/py23119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong> Background</strong><p>Sexual activity and intimacy contribute to wellbeing throughout adult life, including after a heart attack. Providing support and information about sexual activity and intimacy after a heart attack is recognised as part of a comprehensive approach to cardiac rehabilitation. Previous research shows that patients expect health professionals to initiate discussions about sexual activity and intimacy, but that this seldom occurs.</p><strong> Methods</strong><p>Drawing on qualitative survey responses from a range of Australian health professionals working in cardiac care and rehabilitation, this research examined their perspectives on discussing sexual activity and intimacy with their patients, and patients’ partners. Using a social constructionist approach, thematic analysis was used to identify themes expressed by participants.</p><strong> Results</strong><p>Discussions about sexual activity and intimacy after heart attack were perceived as nebulous and taboo. The predominance of an illness – rather than wellness – framing of these discussions and a tendency for health professionals to make judgement calls contributed to discussions not occurring. Health professionals also identified a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural obstacles to discussions, including embarrassment, fear of patients’ embarrassment, a lack of role clarity, the absence of a clear protocol or training to guide practice, and a lack of time, privacy and patient resources.</p><strong> Conclusions</strong><p>Such discussions require normalisation, careful timing, sufficient time and adequate privacy. Staff training, a protocol and appropriate patient resources are needed to support health professionals to initiate discussions. Further research is required that investigates the impact of specific resources and training on health professionals’ practice and patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8651,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian journal of primary health\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian journal of primary health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/py23119\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian journal of primary health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/py23119","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景性活动和亲密关系有助于成年人一生的健康,包括心脏病发作后的健康。在心脏病发作后提供有关性活动和亲密关系的支持和信息被认为是心脏康复综合方法的一部分。以往的研究表明,患者希望医护人员主动与他们讨论性活动和亲密关系,但这种情况很少发生。方法本研究通过对澳大利亚从事心脏护理和康复工作的医护人员进行定性调查,考察了他们与患者及患者伴侣讨论性活动和亲密关系的观点。研究采用社会建构主义方法,通过主题分析来确定参与者表达的主题。结果讨论心脏病发作后的性活动和亲密关系被认为是模糊和禁忌的。这些讨论主要以疾病而非健康为框架,而且医疗专业人员倾向于做出判断,这些都是导致讨论无法进行的原因。医护人员还发现了一系列阻碍讨论的人内、人际和结构性障碍,包括尴尬、害怕患者尴尬、角色不明确、缺乏明确的协议或培训来指导实践,以及缺乏时间、隐私和患者资源。结论此类讨论需要正常化、谨慎的时间安排、充足的时间和充分的隐私。需要对员工进行培训、制定规程并提供适当的患者资源,以支持医护人员开展讨论。需要进一步研究特定资源和培训对医疗专业人员的实践和患者结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Australian health professionals’ perspectives on discussing sexual activity and intimacy with people who have had a heart attack: a qualitative study
Background

Sexual activity and intimacy contribute to wellbeing throughout adult life, including after a heart attack. Providing support and information about sexual activity and intimacy after a heart attack is recognised as part of a comprehensive approach to cardiac rehabilitation. Previous research shows that patients expect health professionals to initiate discussions about sexual activity and intimacy, but that this seldom occurs.

Methods

Drawing on qualitative survey responses from a range of Australian health professionals working in cardiac care and rehabilitation, this research examined their perspectives on discussing sexual activity and intimacy with their patients, and patients’ partners. Using a social constructionist approach, thematic analysis was used to identify themes expressed by participants.

Results

Discussions about sexual activity and intimacy after heart attack were perceived as nebulous and taboo. The predominance of an illness – rather than wellness – framing of these discussions and a tendency for health professionals to make judgement calls contributed to discussions not occurring. Health professionals also identified a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural obstacles to discussions, including embarrassment, fear of patients’ embarrassment, a lack of role clarity, the absence of a clear protocol or training to guide practice, and a lack of time, privacy and patient resources.

Conclusions

Such discussions require normalisation, careful timing, sufficient time and adequate privacy. Staff training, a protocol and appropriate patient resources are needed to support health professionals to initiate discussions. Further research is required that investigates the impact of specific resources and training on health professionals’ practice and patient outcomes.

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
Australian journal of primary health
Australian journal of primary health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
136
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Primary Health integrates the theory and practise of community health services and primary health care. The journal publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed research, reviews, policy reports and analyses from around the world. Articles cover a range of issues influencing community health services and primary health care, particularly comprehensive primary health care research, evidence-based practice (excluding discipline-specific clinical interventions) and primary health care policy issues. Australian Journal of Primary Health is an important international resource for all individuals and organisations involved in the planning, provision or practise of primary health care. Australian Journal of Primary Health is published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of La Trobe University.
期刊最新文献
Australian healthcare professionals’ beliefs and practice behaviours in management of chronic pelvic pain: a cross-sectional survey General practice registrars’ practice in outer metropolitan Australia: a cross-sectional comparison with rural and inner metropolitan areas Hepatitis C elimination: amplifying the role of primary care nurses in Australia Abstracts of the Australasian Association for Academic Primary Care (AAAPC) Annual Research Conference Older patients want to talk about sexual health in Australian primary care
×
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