Loading…

Effectiveness of Japanese SHARE model in improving Taiwanese healthcare personnel's preference for cancer truth telling

Background Communication skills training (CST) based on the Japanese SHARE model of family‐centered truth telling in Asian countries has been adopted in Taiwan. However, its effectiveness in Taiwan has only been preliminarily verified. This study aimed to test the effect of SHARE model‐centered CST...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psycho-oncology (Chichester, England) England), 2014-03, Vol.23 (3), p.259-265
Main Authors: Tang, Woung-Ru, Chen, Kuan-Yu, Hsu, Sheng-Hui, Juang, Yeong-Yuh, Chiu, Shin-Che, Hsiao, Shu-Chun, Fujimori, Maiko, Fang, Chun-Kai
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Communication skills training (CST) based on the Japanese SHARE model of family‐centered truth telling in Asian countries has been adopted in Taiwan. However, its effectiveness in Taiwan has only been preliminarily verified. This study aimed to test the effect of SHARE model‐centered CST on Taiwanese healthcare providers' truth‐telling preference, to determine the effect size, and to compare the effect of 1‐day and 2‐day CST programs on participants' truth‐telling preference. Method For this one‐group, pretest–posttest study, 10 CST programs were conducted from August 2010 to November 2011 under certified facilitators and with standard patients. Participants (257 healthcare personnel from northern, central, southern, and eastern Taiwan) chose the 1‐day (n = 94) or 2‐day (n = 163) CST program as convenient. Participants' self‐reported truth‐telling preference was measured before and immediately after CST programs, with CST program assessment afterward. Results The CST programs significantly improved healthcare personnel's truth‐telling preference (mean pretest and posttest scores ± standard deviation (SD): 263.8 ± 27.0 vs. 281.8 ± 22.9, p 
ISSN:1057-9249
1099-1611
DOI:10.1002/pon.3413