↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions about traditional and novel methods to learn about postoperative pain management: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Advanced Nursing, June 2016
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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
39 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Perceptions about traditional and novel methods to learn about postoperative pain management: a qualitative study
Published in
Journal of Advanced Nursing, June 2016
DOI 10.1111/jan.13021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brynja Ingadottir, Katrin Blondal, Tiny Jaarsma, Ingela Thylen

Abstract

To explore the perceptions of surgical patients about traditional and novel methods to learn about post-operative pain management. Patient education is an important part of post-operative care. Contemporary technology offers new ways for patients to learn about self-care, although face-to-face discussions and brochures are the most common methods of delivering education in nursing practice. A qualitative design with a vignette and semi-structured interviews used for data collection. A purposeful sample of 13 post-surgical patients, who had been discharged from hospital, was recruited during 2013 - 2014. The patients were given a vignette about anticipated hospital discharge after surgery with four different options for communication (face-to-face, brochure, website, serious game) to learn about post-operative pain management. They were asked to rank their preferred method of learning and thereafter to reflect on their choices. Data were analysed using an inductive content analysis approach. Patients preferred face-to-face education with a nurse, followed by brochures and websites, while games were least preferred. Two categories, each with two sub-categories, emerged from the data. These conceptualised the factors affecting patients' perceptions: 1) 'Trusting the source', sub-categorised into 'Being familiar with the method' and 'Having own prejudgments'; and 2) 'Being motivated to learn' sub-categorised into 'Managing an impaired cognition' and 'Aspiring for increased knowledge'. In order to implement successfully novel educational methods into post-operative care, healthcare professionals need to be aware of the factors influencing patients' perceptions about how to learn, such as trust and motivation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iceland 1 1%
Unknown 92 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 18%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 27 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 26 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,407,889
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#553
of 5,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,814
of 369,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#21
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 369,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.