Article

A qualitative study - PURPOSE : To explore the meanings and issues surrounding the use of existing
medical terms for osteoarthritis from the perspective of members of the public
who have consulted healthcare practitioners for arthritic symptoms and from lay
people who have not sought a consultation. METHODS:
Five qualitative focus groups
of 6-8 respondents and six individual in-depth interviews were conducted amongst
a purposive sample of men and women aged 45 years and over, with a spread of and
a range of socio-economic groupings. Key terms were used as stimulus materials.
Focus groups and individual interviews were audio taped, fully transcribed and
underwent line by line analysis, identifying concepts and coded. RESULTS:
Patients were familiar with many of the terms such as arthritis, osteoarthritis,
rheumatism, inflammation, etc. but their level of comprehension varied. Most
terms had little emotional impact. Terms used to describe pathophysiology
elicited negative emotional impact, especially in women. Terms such as
rehabilitation and "self management" were poorly understood and produced negative
emotional impact. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare professionals should not assume that
patients' familiarity with medical terms correlate to understanding the term.
They should be aware of the potential for negative emotional impact related to
some terms. Implications for Rehabilitation Few of the existing medical terms
were understood and accepted by lay participants in the way discussed and
expected by health professionals. Misunderstandings, unintended meanings and
negative emotional responses to terms were common within the study focus groups.
Cutting the jargon and checking understanding of seemingly simple medical terms
is important to improve communication with patients.
As patient access to
treatment notes and correspondence increases in the UK, the impact of written
terms, as well as verbal, needs careful consideration and attention.

Langue : ANGLAIS