4.2 Article

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS) for teaching and assessing patient-centered communication skills in Brazil

Journal

CADERNOS DE SAUDE PUBLICA
Volume 34, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

CADERNOS SAUDE PUBLICA
DOI: 10.1590/0102-311X00013918

Keywords

centered Care; Health Communication; Medical Education; Educational Measurement; Cross-cultural Comparison

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Brazilian educational guidelines reinforce patient-centered care communication skills as an important competence for medical students. The Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS) is an instrument used for teaching and assessing clinicians' communication skills in a person-centered care approach. We aimed to translate and culturally adapt the 4HCS into Brazilian Portuguese. The translation process was accomplished in seven stages: initial translation, reconciliation, back translation, review by the author, independent review, consensus version through Delphi technique, review by a language coordinator, and pretest. During pretest, three independent observers assessed four medical consultations, which were performed by medical students and residents, that had been recorded in a real healthcare scenario. Reviewers had difficulty in reaching consensus on expressions referring to understanding the person as a whole, such as Engage in small talk, Expansion of concerns, Elicit full agenda, Use patient's frame of reference, and Explore plan acceptability. They also had difficulty in reaching consensus on the translation of the word clinician, which was first translated as physician. Historical and cultural issues in the physician-patient relationship may have influenced this result. The Brazilian 4HCS is a culturally, conceptually, semantically and operationally sound instrument. It may represent an important advance for strengthening the person-centered care model in Brazil.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available