| Literature DB >> 30541224 |
Negin Larti1, Elaheh Ashouri2, Akram Aarabi3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was to investigate the effect of a role-playing training program for empathetic communication with patients on empathy scores of operating room nursing students.Entities:
Keywords: Empathy; Iran; Operating room; Role-playing; Students
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30541224 PMCID: PMC6340813 DOI: 10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Educ Eval Health Prof ISSN: 1975-5937
A sample scenario of empathy with a patient in the operating room
| A young man is transferred to the operating room to undergo surgical amputation following a car accident. |
|---|
| Patient: That day, at noon, I took my father’s motorcycle for a ride without his permission. |
| I was on a one-way street, and I didn’t realize it. |
| I did not see that a car was about to hit the motorcycle and I fell off. |
| They took me to the hospital. |
| My right leg was damaged and I underwent several operations. |
| Today, the doctors concluded that it needed to be amputated!!! |
Demographic characteristics of the experimental and control groups
| Variable | Control (n = 41) | Experimental (n = 36) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.70 | ||
| Female | 29 (70.7) | 24 (66.7) | |
| Male | 12 (29.3) | 12 (33.3) | |
| Marital status | 0.36 | ||
| Single | 32 (78.0) | 31 (86.1) | |
| Married | 9 (22.0) | 5 (13.9) | |
| Years of study | 0.88 | ||
| First | 10 (24.4) | 10 (27.8) | |
| Second | 11 (26.8) | 8 (22.2) | |
| Third | 10 (24.4) | 7 (19.4) | |
| Fourth | 10 (24.4) | 11 (30.6) | |
| Age (yr) | 20.83 ± 1.51 | 21.44 ± 2.95 | 0.24 |
Values are presented as frequency (%) or mean±standard deviation.
Comparison of the total mean empathy score and its dimensions before, immediately after, and at 1 month after the intervention between the experimental and control groups
| Dimension | Before intervention | Immediately after intervention | One month after intervention | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Experimental | t-value | P-value | Control | Experimental | t-value | P-value | Control | Experimental | t-value | P-value | |
| Total mean empathy score | 105.95 ± 8.59 | 107.31 ± 8.97 | 0.68 | 0.50 | 103.98 ± 10.48 | 120.58 ± 12.47 | 6.35 | < 0.001 | 105.02 ± 10.46 | 122.11 ± 12.05 | 6.66 | < 0.001 |
| Perspective-taking | 53.83 ± 5.41 | 54.89 ± 5.38 | 0.86 | 0.39 | 52.37 ± 6.33 | 61.78 ± 5.79 | 6.77 | < 0.001 | 53.61 ± 6.35 | 62.53 ± 6.53 | 6.07 | < 0.001 |
| Compassionate care | 44.10 ± 4.79 | 43.89 ± 4.59 | 0.19 | 0.85 | 44.12 ± 4.89 | 48.25 ± 6.41 | 3.20 | 0.002 | 43.71 ± 4.88 | 48.53 ± 5.61 | 4.03 | < 0.001 |
| Standing in patient’s shoes | 8.02 ± 1.99 | 8.53 ± 2.30 | 1.03 | 0.31 | 7.49 ± 2.57 | 10.56 ± 2.37 | 5.42 | < 0.001 | 7.71 ± 2.21 | 11.06 ± 2.32 | 6.49 | < 0.001 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation, unless otherwise stated.
Comparison of the total mean empathy score and its dimensions in the experimental group between paired time intervals
| Dimension | Paired time intervals | P-value |
|---|---|---|
| Total mean empathy score | Before and immediately after the intervention | < 0.001 |
| Before and at 1 month after the intervention | < 0.001 | |
| Immediately after and 1 month after the intervention | 0.94 | |
| Perspective-taking | Before and immediately after the intervention | < 0.001 |
| Before and 1 month after the intervention | < 0.001 | |
| Immediately after and 1 month after the intervention | 0.98 | |
| Compassionate care | Before and immediately after the intervention | < 0.001 |
| Before and 1 month after the intervention | < 0.001 | |
| Immediately after and 1 month after the intervention | 0.97 | |
| Standing in patient’s shoes | Before and immediately after the intervention | < 0.001 |
| Before and 1 month after the intervention | < 0.001 | |
| Immediately after and 1 month after the intervention | 0.35 |