家长在重症监护病房查房时谈话

Joel E. Frader, Charles L. Bosk
{"title":"家长在重症监护病房查房时谈话","authors":"Joel E. Frader,&nbsp;Charles L. Bosk","doi":"10.1016/0271-5384(81)90002-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We analyzed verbatim transcriptions of audiotaped rounds in a large pediatric intensive care unit to determine how physicians refer to families of critically ill children. In almost 4 hours of rounds recorded on 3 days in 1 week, the doctors mentioned the families of 11 of the 25 different patients discussed. There were 19 discreet references to parents or an average of 1 reference every 12<span><math><mtext>1</mtext><mtext>2</mtext></math></span> minutes. Nine references were made during the formal presentation of the patients' medical histories. Three references to parents involved discharge of chronically ill children. The 7 remaining references were about the families of 3 children with grim prognoses.</p><p>Parental references which occurred in presentations and discharge plans had a ceremonial character. Other references to families were infrequent and only occurred when physicians believed medical measures were no longer efficacious. We conclude that doctors do not consider family matters in the systematic way they discuss technical concerns.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":79264,"journal":{"name":"Social science & medicine. Part E, Medical psychology","volume":"15 4","pages":"Pages 267-274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1981-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0271-5384(81)90002-8","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parent talk at intensive care unit rounds\",\"authors\":\"Joel E. Frader,&nbsp;Charles L. Bosk\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0271-5384(81)90002-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We analyzed verbatim transcriptions of audiotaped rounds in a large pediatric intensive care unit to determine how physicians refer to families of critically ill children. In almost 4 hours of rounds recorded on 3 days in 1 week, the doctors mentioned the families of 11 of the 25 different patients discussed. There were 19 discreet references to parents or an average of 1 reference every 12<span><math><mtext>1</mtext><mtext>2</mtext></math></span> minutes. Nine references were made during the formal presentation of the patients' medical histories. Three references to parents involved discharge of chronically ill children. The 7 remaining references were about the families of 3 children with grim prognoses.</p><p>Parental references which occurred in presentations and discharge plans had a ceremonial character. Other references to families were infrequent and only occurred when physicians believed medical measures were no longer efficacious. We conclude that doctors do not consider family matters in the systematic way they discuss technical concerns.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social science & medicine. Part E, Medical psychology\",\"volume\":\"15 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 267-274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1981-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0271-5384(81)90002-8\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social science & medicine. Part E, Medical psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0271538481900028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social science & medicine. Part E, Medical psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0271538481900028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

我们分析了一个大型儿科重症监护病房的逐字录音记录,以确定医生如何提及危重儿童的家庭。在一周内3天的近4个小时的查房记录中,医生提到了25名不同患者中11名的家属。有19次提到父母,平均每1212分钟提到一次。在正式介绍患者病史时,共引用了9篇文献。有三篇文献提到了父母对慢性病患儿的出院。剩下的7篇文献是关于3个预后不佳的孩子的家庭。在报告和出院计划中出现的父母推荐信具有仪式性质。其他提及家庭的情况很少,只有在医生认为医疗措施不再有效时才会出现。我们的结论是,医生不以系统的方式考虑家庭问题,他们讨论的技术问题。
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
Parent talk at intensive care unit rounds

We analyzed verbatim transcriptions of audiotaped rounds in a large pediatric intensive care unit to determine how physicians refer to families of critically ill children. In almost 4 hours of rounds recorded on 3 days in 1 week, the doctors mentioned the families of 11 of the 25 different patients discussed. There were 19 discreet references to parents or an average of 1 reference every 1212 minutes. Nine references were made during the formal presentation of the patients' medical histories. Three references to parents involved discharge of chronically ill children. The 7 remaining references were about the families of 3 children with grim prognoses.

Parental references which occurred in presentations and discharge plans had a ceremonial character. Other references to families were infrequent and only occurred when physicians believed medical measures were no longer efficacious. We conclude that doctors do not consider family matters in the systematic way they discuss technical concerns.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The interpretation of women's experience: A critical appraisal of the literature on breast cancer Parent talk at intensive care unit rounds Age- and sex-related differences in patterns of drug overdose and abuse Stressful life events, psychological symptoms, and psychosocial adjustment in Anglo, Black, and Cuban elderly The perception of different occupations within the medical profession
×
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