4.1 Article

Dietary and physical activity counselling on Type 2 diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance by physicians and nurses in primary healthcare in Finland

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 206-210

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02813430600866463

关键词

content analysis; dietary and physical activity counselling; family practice; type 2 diabetes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To investigate the initiation of dietary and physical activity counselling and the arguments used when discussing physical activity and the type and consumption of dietary fats, during nurse - patient and physician - patient diabetic lifestyle counselling. Design and subjects. This study is a part of a larger follow-up research project focusing on diabetes counselling. The data include 129 videotaped counselling sessions between 17 patients and their physicians and nurses. Content analysis was carried out by identifying the verbal comments and reactions of participants concerning both physical activity and the type and consumption of dietary fats. Results. The physicians and nurses spent little time on dietary and physical activity counselling. The counselling sessions consisted mainly of short questions with minimal feedback from either party. The beginning of the sessions concentrated on blood cholesterol levels and the extent of physical activity. The health professionals failed to emphasize the roles of reduced dietary fats and increased physical activity in substituting for or supplementing diabetes care. Although the patients communicated the factors that encouraged or discouraged physical activity the subject was generally not pursued by the health professionals. Conclusion. Within primary care there is a need for methods that would facilitate the discussion of health behaviour changes. In healthcare settings, education and training are required to develop the communication skills of health professionals in all aspects of preventive medicine.

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

4.1
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