4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Challenges in the communication between 'communication vulnerable' people and their social environment: An exploratory qualitative study

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 92, 期 3, 页码 302-312

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.05.021

关键词

Communication; Long term care; Communication vulnerable people; Communication difficulties

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Communication vulnerable people are often unable to communicate effectively within their social environment, hindering client-centered care and participation in daily life. This study aims to explore the experiences of communication and the factors that influence this in long term care settings. Methods: A qualitative study using the critical incident method. Communication vulnerable clients and people within their immediate environment were interviewed about their communication experiences. Results: Thirty-nine individuals in three settings participated in the interviews, of which 14 were clients. Specific challenges in communication were presented in different relationships. The main influencing factors in the communication between clients and professionals were: effort put into improving the communication, knowledge of the professional, augmentative and alternative communication, time for. communication and the influence and power of the client. Conclusion: Communication vulnerable people and people within their immediate environment face daily challenges in communicating with each other. In particular, communication among clients, can be very difficult. Augmentative and alternative communication tools are only rarely used. Practice implications: Professionals need to develop adequate knowledge and skills to improve their communication. Also, more attention should be focussed on use of AAC, communication between professionals and family members, and support in the communication among clients. (C) 2013 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