Premium
Perceived hazards of transfusion: can a clinician tool help patients' understanding?
Author(s) -
Khan M. H.,
Watson H. G.,
Dombrowski S. U.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
transfusion medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.471
H-Index - 59
eISSN - 1365-3148
pISSN - 0958-7578
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-3148.2012.01165.x
Subject(s) - checklist , medicine , blood transfusion , family medicine , intensive care medicine , surgery , psychology , cognitive psychology
Objective To evaluate the use of a tool prompting counselling behaviour for blood transfusion by assessing clinicians' self‐reported counselling behaviours, and changes in patients' beliefs about transfusion. Methods and materials Mixed quantitative and qualitative methodology undertaken in two phases. In phase 1, clinicians' responses ( n = 12) to a semi‐structured questionnaire were analysed to identify the content of discussions with patients about different aspects of receiving a blood transfusion. The content of discussions was coded using illness representation concepts from the Common Sense Self‐Regulation Model . Phase 2 included patients ( n = 14) scheduled for elective surgery who completed a questionnaire on their beliefs about transfusion before and after counselling. Results The most frequently coded illness representations targeted by clinicians using the tool were ‘consequence of treatment’ (32%) and ‘cure/control’ (30·5%). Two patient beliefs showed significant change following counselling using the checklist. After counselling, patients were more likely to disagree/strongly disagree with the statement that doctors relied too much on transfusion ( P = 0·034) and more likely to agree/strongly agree that blood transfusion can result in new health problems ( P = 0·041). Conclusion This pilot study provides insight into how clinicians use a tool for blood transfusion counselling and shows the potential to influence patients' beliefs about transfusion. Whilst the checklist has a role in standardising practice, this pilot study highlights the need for optimising its use before undertaking a fully randomised evaluation of the tool.