Exploring Communication Needs and Challenges in the Intensive Care Unit: A Survey Study From Providers' and Patients' Perspectives.

PURPOSE: Effective communication between nonspeaking patients and providers is critical for the quality of care in intensive care units (ICUs). This study aims to evaluate perspectives of health care providers and nonspeaking patients on effective communication and communication barriers in the ICU. METHOD: Qualitative and quantitative survey methodologies were employed to evaluate providers' and patients' perspectives on effective communication. Rating scales were utilized to measure patients' frustration levels and communication effectiveness. Open-ended questions were employed to reflect on barriers to communication in the ICU, instances of ineffective communication, and recommendations for enhancing effective communication. RESULTS: The results of the study suggest that nonspeaking patients experienced high levels of frustration due to ineffective communication. However, the data reveal that access to appropriate augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) strategies and materials could help mitigate patients' frustration. Providers mainly communicated via asking yes/no questions, which largely limited the information patients conveyed, leading to frequent communication breakdowns. Providers expressed a desire to participate in training programs to utilize appropriate AAC strategies and promote effective communication. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary survey results on perspectives of patients and providers on effective communication in the ICU. Both providers and patients reported experiencing challenges and frustration during their communication, due to barriers such as providers' insufficient training experience and lack of access to AAC materials. Skill training is warranted to promote effective patient-provider communication in intensive care settings. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26339623.

Gender Communication Differences on a Pediatric Provider Listserv.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gender-based communication differences are described in educational online communities, but have not been rigorously evaluated in medical online communities. Understanding gender differences in communication may provide insight into gender disparities in the medical profession. Our objective was to describe gender differences in post frequency, content, and language styles on the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Hospital Medicine (SOHM) listserv. METHODS: Posts were obtained from publicly available SOHM listserv archives. The first month of every quarter of 2019 and 2020 were reviewed. Two reviewers assigned a post topic (clinical, research, etc) and format (question vs statement) to all deidentified original posts (K = 1.0 topic, 0.89 format). Six trained reviewers assigned language styles (intraclass coefficient = 0.73, indicating good agreement). RESULTS: We analyzed 1592 posts: 287 original posts and 1305 responses. Frequency: Women authored 50% of posts. The 9 most frequent posters (7 men, 2 women) accounted for 19.5% of posts. Content: Men's posts had more words than women's (132.51 vs 112.3, P ≤ .01). Men were more likely to post about health policy and research (P < .001). Men were more likely to post statements compared with women (39% vs 21%, P < .001). Style: Men's posts were more likely to be coded adversarial (12.3% vs 5.5%, P < .001) authoritative (12.2% vs 6.5%, P < .001) or self-amplifying (6.5% vs 3.6%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Women contribute disproportionately fewer posts to the American Academy of Pediatrics SOHM listserv compared with their percentage in the subspecialty. We noted significant gender differences in language style and content, which may impact career development and online community inclusion.

Blood Glucose Testing Lancet and Paper Clip as a Milia Extractor.

In low-resource settings, dermatologists may not have the preferred tools needed to evaluate a patient or perform a procedure. Commonplace affordable supplies can be substituted when needed. We describe the use of a blood glucose testing lancet and a paper clip for milia extraction.