↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting communication in emergency departments: doctors and nurses’ perceptions of communication in a trilingual ED in Hong Kong

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Emergency Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
234 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Factors affecting communication in emergency departments: doctors and nurses’ perceptions of communication in a trilingual ED in Hong Kong
Published in
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12245-015-0095-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jack K.H. Pun, Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, Kristen A. Murray, Diana Slade

Abstract

This study investigates clinicians' views of clinician-patient and clinician-clinician communication, including key factors that prevent clinicians from achieving successful communication in a large, high-pressured trilingual Emergency Department (ED) in Hong Kong. Researchers interviewed 28 doctors and nurses in the ED. The research employed a qualitative ethnographic approach. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, translated into English and coded using the Nvivo software. The researchers examined issues in both clinician-patient and clinician-clinician communication. Through thematic analyses, they identified the factors that impede communication most significantly, as well as the relationship between these factors. This research highlights the significant communication issues and patterns in Hong Kong EDs. The clinician interviews revealed that communication in EDs is complex, nuanced and fragile. The data revealed three types of communication issues: (1) the experiential parameter (i.e. processes and procedures), (2) the interpersonal parameter (i.e. clinicians' engagements with patients and other clinicians) and (3) contextual factors (i.e. time pressures, etc.). Within each of these areas, the specific problems were the following: compromises in knowledge transfer at key points of transition (e.g. triage, handover), inconsistencies in medical record keeping, serious pressures on clinicians (e.g. poor clinician-patient ratio and long working hours for clinicians) and a lack of focus on interpersonal skills. These communication problems (experiential, interpersonal and contextual) are intertwined, creating a complex yet weak communication structure that compromises patient safety, as well as patient and clinician satisfaction. The researchers argue that hospitals should develop and implement best-practice policies and educational programmes for clinicians that focus on the following: (1) understanding the primary causes of communication problems in EDs, (2) accepting the tenets and practices of patient-centred care, (3) establishing clear and consistent knowledge transfer procedures and (4) lowering the patient-to-clinician ratio in order to create the conditions that foster successful communication. The research provides a model for future research on the relationship between communication and the quality and safety of the patient safety.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 233 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 19%
Student > Bachelor 34 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 7%
Researcher 15 6%
Student > Postgraduate 13 6%
Other 43 18%
Unknown 67 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 68 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 41 18%
Social Sciences 12 5%
Unspecified 9 4%
Linguistics 6 3%
Other 28 12%
Unknown 70 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,924,876
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#138
of 602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,235
of 390,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.