摘要
目的调查二级及以上医院临床在职护士对目前使用的平面健康教育材料可读性的评价,了解护士对健康教育材料可读性的认知情况,为今后可读性评估的研究奠定基础。方法2017年7月,来自安徽省各地二级及以上147所医院的310名学员集中在安徽医科大学进行理论学习。本研究利用第一阶段的理论培训时机(2017年7月3—14日)对全体学员开展调查。采用一般情况调查表、平面健康教育材料质量调查表、可读性认知调查表进行调查。本研究共发放问卷310份,回收有效问卷283份,有效应答率为91.3%。结果平面健康教育材料可读性评价结果显示,有36名报告所在科室没有针对患者的健康教育资源。247名报告所在科室提供平面健康教育材料,其中56.7%认为其所在科室的平面健康教育材料在内容上存在医学术语过多,53.8%认为未对重点信息进行总结或强调,61.9%认为内容老旧。相较于三级医院,任职于二级医院的护士更多地认为其所在医院的平面健康教育材料存在"医学术语过多""内容老旧"问题,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);对健康教育材料应用情况的评价结果显示,247名临床在职护士报告,现有的健康教育材料主要从以下渠道获得,其中64.8%为自行设计,79.4%为外部机构,68.4%从网络资源渠道获得。与任职三级医院的护士相比,二级医院护士更多地反映其所在科室提供相同健康教育材料给不同疾病时期的患者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);对平面健康教育材料可读性评价的认知情况,48.8%听说过可读性概念;94.7%认为有必要评估健康教育材料可读性;但只有20.5%了解可读性评估方法,具备可读性评价能力。结论目前临床使用的平面健康教育材料在可读性和应用方式上均有待改善,且对可读性的评估能力较低。临床健康教育材料的开发者应重视对材料的可读性评估,借鉴国外可读性研究的方法与
Objective To investigate the readability evaluation of the printed health education materials by working nurses, to understand the perception of readability of health education materials and to lay the basis for future research on readability evaluation. Methods In July 2017, 310 students from 147 hospitals (secondary and above) from all over Anhui Province were trained at Anhui Medical University. This study utilized the first stage of this training opportunity (July 3-14, 2017) to conduct an investigation of all participants. Surveys were conducted using a general survey, a printed health education material quality questionnaire, and a readability perception questionnaire. A total of 310 questionnaires were distributed in this study, and 283 valid questionnaires were returned. The effective response rate was 91.3%. Results The results of the readability evaluation of the printed health education materials showed that 36 participants reported that there were no health education resources for the patients in their departments. 247 participants reported that they provided printed health education materials in their departments, 56.7% of them believed that the health education materials of their departments had too many medical terminologies, 53.8% thought that the key information was not summarized or emphasized, and 61.9% thought that the content was too old. Compared with the tertiary hospitals, the nurses working in the secondary hospitals thought that the health education materials in their hospitals had "too many medical terms" and "old content", and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The results of the evaluation of the application of health education materials showed that 247 clinical nurses reported that the existing health education materials were mainly obtained from the following channels, of which 64.8% were self-designed, 79.4% were from external institutions, and 68.4% were from online resources. Compared with the nurses in the tertiary hospitals, the nurses in the secondary hospi
作者
汪秋伊
谢伦芳
李梦璐
刘卓
方兰
杨艳
Wang Qiuyi;Xie Lunfang;Li Menglu;Liu Zhuo;Fang Lan;Yang Yan(School of Nursing, Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230032, China)
出处
《中华现代护理杂志》
2019年第9期1093-1098,共6页
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
基金
全国人文社会科学课题(18BJR01023).
关键词
护士
平面健康教育材料
可读性
评价
Nurses
Printed education materials
Readability
Assessment
