Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Laypeople's (Mis)Understanding of Common Medical Acronyms.
Praska, Corinne; Pitt, Michael B; Marmet, Jordan; Gotlieb, Rachael; Charpentier, Victoria; Hause, Emily; Allen, Katherine A; Lunos, Scott; Hendrickson, Marissa A.
Afiliação
  • Praska C; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Pitt MB; Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Marmet J; M Health Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Gotlieb R; Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Charpentier V; M Health Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Hause E; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Allen KA; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Lunos S; Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • Hendrickson MA; M Health Fairview Masonic Children's Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Hosp Pediatr ; 13(10): e269-e273, 2023 10 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37743804
OBJECTIVES: Abbreviations are often used in medicine yet may be a source of confusion for patients and their families. We aimed to determine the general public's understanding of commonly used medical acronyms. METHODS: For this cross-sectional study, we surveyed state fair visitors regarding their understanding of 5 common medical acronyms. An electronic survey was administered to a volunteer sample of adults who spoke and read English and who had never trained to work in medicine or nursing. Free-text responses were coded as correct, partially correct, or incorrect by 2 independent researchers, adding a third researcher if consensus was not reached. Analysis methods included descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: We recruited 204 volunteers (55% female; mean age 43 years; 67% had a bachelor's degree or higher). ED (emergency department) was correctly defined by 32%, PCP (primary care provider/physician) by 18%, CBC (complete blood count) by 14%, and PRN (as needed) and NPO (nothing by mouth) by 13% each. Female gender was associated with higher odds of correctly understanding NPO (odds ratio, 3.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.21; P = .02); older age was associated with higher odds of understanding PRN (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.05; P = .04). Education level was not found to correlate significantly with successful explanation of any tested acronym. CONCLUSIONS: Medical acronyms are a predictable source of miscommunication. In this large cross-sectional study, none of the acronyms evaluated was understood correctly by more than one-third of adults. Clinicians should avoid using acronyms with patients and families to minimize confusion.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Médicos / Medicina Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Hosp Pediatr Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Médicos / Medicina Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Hosp Pediatr Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article