| Literature DB >> 34233674 |
Linda Messineo1, Luciano Seta2, Mario Allegra2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficient management of relational competences in healthcare professionals is crucial to ensuring that a patient's treatment and care process is conducted positively. Empathy is a major component of the relational skills expected of health professionals. Knowledge of undergraduate healthcare students' empathic abilities is important for educators in designing specific and efficient educational programmes aimed at supporting or enhancing such competences. In this study, we measured first-year undergraduate nursing students' attitudes towards professional empathy in clinical encounters. The students' motivations for entering nursing education were also evaluated. This study takes a multi-method approach based on the use of qualitative and quantitative tools to examine the association between students' positive attitudes towards the value of empathy in health professionals and their prosocial and altruistic motivations in choosing to engage in nursing studies.Entities:
Keywords: Degree choice; Empathy; Jefferson scale of empathy – health professions students version; Thematic analysis; Undergraduate students
Year: 2021 PMID: 34233674 PMCID: PMC8262004 DOI: 10.1186/s12912-021-00620-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nurs ISSN: 1472-6955
Inductively inferred categories
| Theme | Brief description | Illustrative quotes |
|---|---|---|
| HEL | Willingness to feel useful and to affect the health of others. | |
| HUM | The desire to enter into contact with other people. | |
| FAM | Significant others, such as family members, have significant influence on the students’ career decision. | |
| TOP | A personal interest in health-related scientific topics. | |
| JOB | The possibility of secure employment and job stability. | |
| EXP | Healthcare-related experience, such as voluntary work in healthcare settings or a family member’s hospitalisation. | |
| Other | Not being able to get into other chosen study programmes, etc. |
Absolute and relative frequencies of motivation categories; relative frequencies of categories with respect to students’ sex and ages
| n | Tot (%) | Females (%) | Males (%) | Young (%) | Mid (%) | Old (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EXP | 14 | 18.18 | 25.00 | 7.41 | 18.75 | 22.22 | 11.11 |
| HUM | 19 | 24.68 | 27.08 | 22.22 | 25.00 | 29.63 | 16.67 |
| HEL | 57 | 74.03 | 83.33 | 62.96 | 75.00 | 81.48 | 61.11 |
| FAM | 5 | 6.49 | 4.17 | 11.11 | 3.12 | 7.41 | 11.11 |
| JOB | 22 | 28.57 | 18.75 | 48.15 | 28.12 | 22.22 | 38.89 |
| TOP | 17 | 22.08 | 16.67 | 33.33 | 18.75 | 25.93 | 22.22 |
Young: students with age ≤ 19 years; Mid: students with age > 19 and ≤ 21 years; Old: students with age > 21 years
EXP Healthcare-related personal experiences, HUM Human contact, HEL Willingness to care for people, FAM Family tradition, JOB Job opportunities, TOP Personal interest in scientific topics
Fig. 1Associations among categories using the correlation matrix. The intensity of the colour grey indicates a stronger association; clusters are highlighted on the left and superior margins
Component matrix for motivational categories
| RC1 | RC2 | RC3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXP | −0.25 | −0.54 | |
| HUM | 0.07 | 0.14 | |
| HEL | −0.42 | 0.07 | |
| FAM | 0.11 | −0.10 | |
| JOB | −0.08 | 0.14 | |
| TOP | 0.01 | −0.03 |
The highest absolute load for each motivational item is in bold
RCs are the three Rotated Components
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalisation
Descriptive statistics for JSE-HPS (N = 77 first-year nursing students)
| Statistics | Total | Perspective taking | Compassionate care | Standing in patient’s shoes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 111.88 | 57.6 | 44.69 | 9.60 |
| Standard Deviation | 11.90 | 7.35 | 5.39 | 2.66 |
| 25th percentile | 104 | 53 | 41 | 8 |
| 50th percentile (median) | 113 | 60 | 45 | 9 |
| 75th percentile | 122 | 62 | 49 | 11 |
| Possible Range | 20–140 | 10–70 | 8–56 | 2–14 |
| Actual Range | 75–132 | 36–70 | 28–55 | 4–14 |
| Cronbach’s alpha | 0.79 | 0.65 | 0.58 | 0.56 |
Comparisons of the total JSE-HPS scores for first-year nursing students with respect to different groups: sex, age, and motivational categories
| Groups | n | M | SD | U test (a) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male students | 29 | 106.90 | 12.97 | 942.5 | .005** |
| Female students | 48 | 114.90 | 10.20 | ||
| All students | 77 | 111.88 | 11.90 | ||
| Young (≤ 19 years) | 32 | 112.75 | 11.86 | 762 | .332 |
| Mid (> 19 and ≤ 21 years) | 27 | 110.41 | 11.92 | 596 | .199 |
| Old (> 21 years) | 18 | 112.56 | 12.39 | 568 | .328 |
| Healthcare-related personal experiences (EXP) | 14 | 112.86 | 15.38 | 499 | .222 |
| Human contact (HUM) | 19 | 109.84 | 13.48 | 505 | .293 |
| The willingness to care for people (HEL) | 57 | 112.95 | 9.80 | 614 | .302 |
| Family tradition (FAM) | 4 | 113.00 | 11.25 | 186 | .451 |
| Job opportunities (JOB) | 22 | 109.59 | 12.35 | 515.5 | .156 |
| Personal interest (TOP) | 17 | 105.35 | 15.32 | 348.5 | .024* |
(a) For the group comparison, the Mann-Whitney U non-parametric test was used, dividing the sample into two independent groups according to their membership status. The symbols (*) and (**) indicate levels of significance greater than 95% and 99%, respectively
Two regression models between the RC1 and RC2 dimensions for students’ motivation and JSE-HPS scores
| (intercept) | −1.888 | 1.070 | −1.765 | 0.0816 | . |
| JSE_TOT | 0.017 | 0.009 | 1.777 | 0.080 | . |
| (intercept) | 1.865 | 0.939 | 1.986 | 0.051 | . |
| JSE_CC | −0.042 | 0.021 | −2.000 | 0.049 | * |
JSE_TOT: JSE-HPS total score
JSE_CC: scores in the JSE-HPS subscale ‘Compassionate Care’
RC1 and RC2 the first two Rotated Component obtained in the PCA (Table 3)