4.5 Review

Effective training strategies for teaching communication skills to physicians: An overview of systematic reviews

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 84, 期 2, 页码 152-162

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.010

关键词

Communication skills training; Physician-patient communication; Training strategies; Feedback; Role-play

资金

  1. Dutch Institute of Employee Benefit Schemes (UWV)
  2. Dutch 'Stichting Instituut Gak'

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Physicians need good communication skills to communicate effectively with patients. The objective of this review was to identify effective training strategies for teaching communication skills to qualified physicians. Methods: PubMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and COCHRANE were searched in October 2008 and in March 2009. Two authors independently selected relevant reviews and assessed their methodological quality with AMSTAR. Summary tables were constructed for data-synthesis, and results were linked to outcome measures. As a result, conclusions about the effectiveness of communication skills training strategies for physicians could be drawn. Results: Twelve systematic reviews on communication skills training programmes for physicians were identified. Some focused on specific training strategies, whereas others emphasized a more general approach with mixed strategies. Training programmes were effective if they lasted for at least one day, were learner-centred, and focused on practising skills. The best training strategies within the programmes included role-play, feedback, and small group discussions. Conclusion: Training programmes should include active, practice-oriented strategies. Oral presentations on communication skills, modelling, and written information should only be used as supportive strategies. Practice implications: lobe able to compare the effectiveness of training programmes more easily in the future, general agreement on outcome measures has to be established. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据