再探醫學專業素養－以名義團體技巧進行探討

Medical Professionalism Revisited: Application of the Nominal Group Technique

10.6145/jme.201003_14(1).0002

余坤興(Kun-Hsing Yu)；黃天祥(Tien-Shang Huang)；楊泮池(Pan-Chyr Yang)；何明蓉(Ming-Jung Ho)

醫學專業素養 ； 名義團體技巧 ； medical professionalism ； nominal group technique

Journal of Medical Education

14卷1期（2010 / 03 / 01）

15 - 22

繁體中文

醫學專業素養的核心內涵近年來一直是醫學教育者熱中討論的議題，然而，目前國內的研究相當有限，國外的研究大多也僅涵蓋醫師、學生與病人的觀點，並未全盤掌握所有所成醫療從業人員與醫療輔助人員的看法。本研究透過名義團體技巧，針對主治醫師、教學總醫師、護理人員、醫學人文教師、學生與病友團體進行抽樣，依據工作類別進行分組，邀請他們深入討論醫學專業素養的核心元素，並票選出各個概念的重要性順位。我們發現不同工作類別的成員所提出的項目具有顯著的差異：醫師與學生較注重自我學習成長、護理人員與學生均重視情緒管理、醫學人文教師側重人文關懷，病友團體則強調需以病人為中心。雖有這些差異，大多數的組別均將溝通能力與道德要求列為首要考量。本研究結果可供往後國內外醫學專業素養議題研究及教學之參考。

Medical professionalism has been widely discussed by medical educators lately. However, only a few studies have been conducted in Taiwan. Furthermore, most studies conducted abroad represent only the perspectives of faculty members, medical doctors, students and patients and exclude the perspectives of other health care professionals. Utilizing the nominal group technique, this research included the following subjects: attending physicians, teaching chief residents, medical humanities educators, nurses, students and patient advocates. The participants identified the key elements of medical professionalism in depth and then ranked the importance of the elements they had nominated. Our results reveal that participants from different occupational groups viewed medical professionalism differently. Medical doctors and students emphasize self-learning. Nurses and medical students view emotional management as a crucial component. Medical humanities educators place stress on humanism. Patient advocates believe patient-centeredness to be the most important element. Although there were differences among the groups, most of them regarded communication and ethics as the most important items. This study should serve as a foundation for carrying out research on and teaching medical professionalism in the future.

1. Tsai, S.L.,Chang, S.C.,HO, M.J.(2008).Core competence in medical humanities education: exploratory study by nominal group technique.Taiwan J Med Educ,12(2),12-18.
   連結：
2. Cohen, J.J.(2006).Professionalism in medical education, an American perspective: from evidence to accountability.Med Educ,40(7),607-617.
3. Cruess, R.,McIlroy, J.H.,Cruess, S.(2006).The professionalism mini-evaluation exercise: a preliminary investigation.Acad Med,81(10),S74-S78.
4. Cruess, R.L.,Cruess, S.R.(1997).Teaching medicine as a profession in the service of healing.Acad Med,72(11),941-951.
5. Cruess, R.L.,Cruess, S.R.(2008).Expectations and obligations: professionalism and medicine's social contract with society.Perspect Biol Med,51(4),579-598.
6. Delbecq, A.L.,Van de Ven, A.H.(1971).A group process model for problem identification and program planning.J Appl Behav Sic,7(4),466-492.
7. Dobbie, A.,Rhodes, M.,Tysinger, J.W.(2004).Using a modified nominal group technique as a curriculum evaluation tool.Fam Med,36(6),402-406.
8. Fei, J.G.(2005).Medical humanities in general education teaching: perspective from linguistics and medical history.Journal of the Chinese for General Education,12(2),1-16.
9. Gallagher, M.,Hares, T.,Spencer, J.(1993).The nominal group technique: a research tool for general practice?.Fam Pract,10(1),76-81.
10. Green, M.,Zick, A.,Makoul, G.(2009).Defining professionalism from the perspective of patients, physicians, and nurses.Acad Med,84(5),566-573.
11. Medical Professionalism P(2002).Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter.Lancet,359,520-522.
12. Royal College of Physicians of London(2005).Doctors in society: medical professionalism in a changing world.London UK:Royal College of Physicians of London.
13. Wagner, P.,Hendrich, J.,Moseley, G.(2007).Defining medical professionalism: a qualitative study.Med Educ,41,288-294.