A narrative medicine‐based training program increases the humanistic care quality of new nurses in cancer hospital
Ningning Lu,Zhuyue Ma,Yanyan Shi,Shanshan Yao,Liuliu Zhang,Jingyi Shan,Liying Zhai,Caiyu Li,Fang Cheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/prm2.12091
2023-01-03
Precision Medical Sciences
Abstract:First, we recruit 101 new nurses (Inclusion criteria: registered nurse; have completed the prejob training and have worked for 6 months to 3 years; informed consent to participate in this study). Exclusion criteria: new nurses who are absent for various reasons (e.g., health, family, etc.). A narrative medicine‐based training program is implemented for these new nurses. The program had three 2‐h lectures, each lecture 1 week apart, and monthly a narrative nursing case report after three lectures for 6 months. Before training, the humanistic care quality and empathy ability of these nurses were assessed. After 6 months of training, the quality of humanistic care and empathy of the population were reassessed. With the change of medical model, the cancer nurses should not only pay attention to patients' physical pain, but also patients' psychological distress, which requires cancer nurses to have a high quality of humanistic care. This study aims to explore the humanistic care quality of new nurses in cancer hospital and effects of the narrative medicine‐based training program on the new nurses of cancer hospital. A total of 101 new nurses in a cancer hospital received the narrative medicine‐based training in 2020. Before and after the training, they were investigated with humanistic care quality questionnaire and empathy ability questionnaire. The course included narrative therapy overview, narrative medicine overview, narrative nursing, psychological nursing cases of cancer patients, and so on. After training, the total score of the humanistic care and quality empathy ability increased significantly, and the comparison was statistically significant. The total score of empathy after the training (98.44 ± 2.23) was higher than the score before the training (86.35 ± 7.53) (p