Demystifying Research for Medical and Healthcare Students. John L. Anderson

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Demystifying Research for Medical and Healthcare Students - John L. Anderson страница 22

Demystifying Research for Medical and Healthcare Students - John L. Anderson

Скачать книгу

‘Patient’ Characteristics in each Vignette
Male Female
Age 35 Age 65 Age 35 Age 65
Low SES High SES Low SES High SES Low SES High SES Low SES High SES
B H W B H W B H W B H W B H W B H W B H W B H W
Less Experienced More Experienced Less Experienced More Experienced
Male Female
Physician Characteristics

      They recruited 97 patients who were admitted to their hospital for abdominal operations (appendicectomy, cholycystectomy, etc.). These were randomly allocated to a ‘special care’ (experimental) group or a ‘normal care’ (control) group. The control group all received their normal treatment – no more and no less. Throughout their hospital stay.

      Those in the special care group received their normal care, plus:

      1 When the anaesthetist visited them the evening before the operation, they were told that they would experience pain after the operation, how severe it would be, and how long it would last. They were reassured that this pain was normal after an operation.

      2 They were told that they would receive pain killing drugs.

      3 They were given advice about how to minimise the pain – by relaxing the abdominal muscles. They were given instructions on how to turn over in bed, and they were told that they should request medication if they needed it.

      4 On the afternoon, after the operation, the anaesthetist visited them again. He went over what he had told them the evening before; reassured them that their pain was normal; and they were again told to ask for medication if they wanted it.

      5 This was repeated the next morning, and once or twice a day until they did not need any more analgesic medication.

      The control group received their normal care throughout.

      An independent observer (an anaesthetist who the patients had not met) visited 57 of them to record the patients' evaluations about their pain, as well as noting his own impressions about their appearance.

      This was a double‐blind experiment. The patients were not told that they were part of an experiment – first blind. The nursing staff, who administered the medications, and the surgical staff who made decisions about the patients' discharge, did not know that there was an experiment in progress – second blind. In this way, they avoided the… what? That's right … the Hawthorne Effect, or in this case, the placebo effect. The researchers were well aware of the potential for a placebo effect – enhanced by patients trying to please them and nursing staff trying to please the surgeons – or vice versa. So by using the double‐blind design, they minimised, to the best of their ability, the potential for this.

      1 They identified a problem− post‐operative pain in surgical patients.

      2 They developed an intervention based upon current theory and knowledge – the psychology of fear and stress. They took from that the fact that if we know in advance that something stressful or unpleasant is about to happen, then we are better able to prepare ourselves to deal with it. And, if we have a sense of control, we are more likely to be able to cope with it.

      3 Their interventions were based upon theory ‐ aspects of the of the psychology of fear and stress (Janis, 1958). These were: (i) anticipation – warning the patients in advance that they would experience pain; and (ii) giving them a sense of control – ‘you can do this to help avoid the pain’ and ‘you can ask for as much pain‐killing medication as you want’. They worked!

      4 They engaged an appropriate methodology – a twin‐arm, double‐blind, experimental approach, and chose a consecutive series of patients to participate in it.

      5 They

Скачать книгу