专家病人领导社会正义活动:实现以病人为中心的教育。

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Nursing Ethics Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-21 DOI:10.1177/09697330231217038
Maria Feijoo-Cid, Antonia Arreciado Marañón, María Isabel Fernández-Cano, Rosa María García-Sierra
{"title":"专家病人领导社会正义活动:实现以病人为中心的教育。","authors":"Maria Feijoo-Cid, Antonia Arreciado Marañón, María Isabel Fernández-Cano, Rosa María García-Sierra","doi":"10.1177/09697330231217038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social justice is recognized by reputable international organizations as a professional nursing value. However, there are serious doubts as to whether it is embodied in Catalan nursing education.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To explore what nursing students take away from two teaching activities led by expert patients (one presentation and three expert patient illness narratives) on the topics of social justice, patient rights, and person-centered care.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Qualitative study using a content analysis approach. The research plan included (1) think-pair-share activities (additional faculty-assisted presentation and three faculty-assisted, semi-structured scripted narratives); (2) paired reflections; (3) focus groups; and (4) content analysis of paired reflections and focus groups.</p><p><strong>Participants and research context: </strong>Fourth-year nursing degree students at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), Spain. Convenience sampling was used.</p><p><strong>Ethical considerations: </strong>The UAB Research Ethics Committee did not deem it necessary to apply any specific measures. We fully explained to patients that they could decide what medical information they would share with the students that was relevant to their learning, and we provided students with guidelines about patient confidentiality, dignity, and respect.</p><p><strong>Findings/results: </strong>The students engaged in reflection about their education (recognizing that it had been centered on the professional and not the patient) and their relationship with the patient, in which they reproduced low-involvement patient care by modeling behaviors of their nurse educator. Moreover, they valued a person-centered care model with an emphasis on the emotional part but left out decision-making as an individual right of people.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The think-pair-share activities were useful to spark self-reflection among students, who identified aspects to change in their own practice, and reflected about their own education process, both of which promote change.</p>","PeriodicalId":49729,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1233-1246"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11471042/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expert patients leading activities on social justice: towards patient-centered education.\",\"authors\":\"Maria Feijoo-Cid, Antonia Arreciado Marañón, María Isabel Fernández-Cano, Rosa María García-Sierra\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09697330231217038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social justice is recognized by reputable international organizations as a professional nursing value. However, there are serious doubts as to whether it is embodied in Catalan nursing education.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To explore what nursing students take away from two teaching activities led by expert patients (one presentation and three expert patient illness narratives) on the topics of social justice, patient rights, and person-centered care.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Qualitative study using a content analysis approach. The research plan included (1) think-pair-share activities (additional faculty-assisted presentation and three faculty-assisted, semi-structured scripted narratives); (2) paired reflections; (3) focus groups; and (4) content analysis of paired reflections and focus groups.</p><p><strong>Participants and research context: </strong>Fourth-year nursing degree students at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), Spain. Convenience sampling was used.</p><p><strong>Ethical considerations: </strong>The UAB Research Ethics Committee did not deem it necessary to apply any specific measures. We fully explained to patients that they could decide what medical information they would share with the students that was relevant to their learning, and we provided students with guidelines about patient confidentiality, dignity, and respect.</p><p><strong>Findings/results: </strong>The students engaged in reflection about their education (recognizing that it had been centered on the professional and not the patient) and their relationship with the patient, in which they reproduced low-involvement patient care by modeling behaviors of their nurse educator. Moreover, they valued a person-centered care model with an emphasis on the emotional part but left out decision-making as an individual right of people.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The think-pair-share activities were useful to spark self-reflection among students, who identified aspects to change in their own practice, and reflected about their own education process, both of which promote change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Ethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1233-1246\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11471042/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231217038\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231217038","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:社会公正被著名的国际组织公认为护理专业的价值观。然而,人们对加泰罗尼亚护理教育中是否体现了这一价值观存在严重疑问:探讨护理专业学生从专家患者主持的两次教学活动(一次演讲和三次专家患者疾病叙述)中获得了哪些关于社会公正、患者权利和以人为本的护理主题的知识:采用内容分析法进行定性研究。研究计划包括:(1)思考配对分享活动(额外的教师协助演讲和三个教师协助的半结构化叙述);(2)配对反思;(3)焦点小组;以及(4)配对反思和焦点小组的内容分析:参与者和研究背景:西班牙巴塞罗那自治大学(UAB)护理专业四年级学生。采用便利抽样法:巴塞罗那自治大学研究伦理委员会认为没有必要采取任何具体措施。我们向患者充分说明,他们可以决定与学生分享哪些与其学习相关的医疗信息,我们还向学生提供了有关患者保密、尊严和尊重的指南:学生们对自己所受的教育(认识到教育是以专业人员而非患者为中心)以及与患者的关系进行了反思,在反思过程中,他们以护士教育者的行为为榜样,再现了低参与度的患者护理。此外,她们重视以人为本的护理模式,强调情感部分,却忽略了决策是人的个人权利:思考与分享活动有助于引发学生的自我反思,他们发现了自己在实践中需要改变的方面,并对自己的教育过程进行了反思,这两点都促进了学生的改变。
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
Expert patients leading activities on social justice: towards patient-centered education.

Background: Social justice is recognized by reputable international organizations as a professional nursing value. However, there are serious doubts as to whether it is embodied in Catalan nursing education.

Objectives: To explore what nursing students take away from two teaching activities led by expert patients (one presentation and three expert patient illness narratives) on the topics of social justice, patient rights, and person-centered care.

Research design: Qualitative study using a content analysis approach. The research plan included (1) think-pair-share activities (additional faculty-assisted presentation and three faculty-assisted, semi-structured scripted narratives); (2) paired reflections; (3) focus groups; and (4) content analysis of paired reflections and focus groups.

Participants and research context: Fourth-year nursing degree students at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), Spain. Convenience sampling was used.

Ethical considerations: The UAB Research Ethics Committee did not deem it necessary to apply any specific measures. We fully explained to patients that they could decide what medical information they would share with the students that was relevant to their learning, and we provided students with guidelines about patient confidentiality, dignity, and respect.

Findings/results: The students engaged in reflection about their education (recognizing that it had been centered on the professional and not the patient) and their relationship with the patient, in which they reproduced low-involvement patient care by modeling behaviors of their nurse educator. Moreover, they valued a person-centered care model with an emphasis on the emotional part but left out decision-making as an individual right of people.

Conclusions: The think-pair-share activities were useful to spark self-reflection among students, who identified aspects to change in their own practice, and reflected about their own education process, both of which promote change.

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
Nursing Ethics
Nursing Ethics 医学-护理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.90%
发文量
117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Ethics takes a practical approach to this complex subject and relates each topic to the working environment. The articles on ethical and legal issues are written in a comprehensible style and official documents are analysed in a user-friendly way. The international Editorial Board ensures the selection of a wide range of high quality articles of global significance.
期刊最新文献
Sources of moral distress in nursing professionals: A scoping review. Truth-telling, and ethical considerations in terminal care: an Eastern perspective. Ethical considerations in the UK-Nepal nurse recruitment: Nepali nurses' perspectives. Nurses on the outside, problems on the inside! The duty of nurses to support unions. Care and justice reasoning in nurses' everyday ethics.
×
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