PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Facemasks are an important piece of personal protective equipment (PPE) to mitigate the spread of respiratory illnesses, but they can impede communication between patients and healthcare providers. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify effective communication practices while wearing facemasks.
Scoping review using a systematic search of articles from the PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases.
The PEO (population, exposure, outcome) methodology was selected for this systematic scoping review. The population of interest (P) includes humans of all ages (children, adults, and older adults); the exposure of interest (E) is PPE that covers the mouth (i.e., facemasks); and the outcome of interest (O) is successful or unsuccessful communication practices. The Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice for Nurses and Healthcare Professionals appraisal guidelines were used to determine the level and quality of the research.
Thirty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria. Seventeen of these were high- or good-quality research studies, and the remaining 22 were non-research articles included with separate analysis as part of the scoping review. The 17 articles encompassed 2656 participants. The highest quality evidence indicated that standard surgical masks have the least impact on speech perception compared to other non-transparent mask types, and that recognizing emotions is less accurate with facemasks, necessitating compensatory actions (i.e., reducing extraneous noise, using a microphone to amplify voice, and employing clear speech). Evidence was contradictory regarding the use of transparent masks. Evidence was of limited quality for other non-verbal and verbal communication strategies.
Awareness of communication challenges is crucial when wearing facemasks. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate communication techniques when speakers are wearing facemasks. Basic strategies such as selecting an appropriate mask type, reducing extraneous noise, using microphones, verbalizing emotions, and employing clear speech appear to be beneficial.
The findings of this scoping review highlight the importance of considering communication challenges while wearing facemasks in the healthcare settings. The review suggests that selecting an appropriate mask type, reducing extraneous noise, verbalizing emotions, and employing clear speech are some strategies that may be effective in mitigating the impact of facemasks on communication between patients and healthcare providers.
Scoping review using a systematic search of articles from the PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases.
The PEO (population, exposure, outcome) methodology was selected for this systematic scoping review. The population of interest (P) includes humans of all ages (children, adults, and older adults); the exposure of interest (E) is PPE that covers the mouth (i.e., facemasks); and the outcome of interest (O) is successful or unsuccessful communication practices. The Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice for Nurses and Healthcare Professionals appraisal guidelines were used to determine the level and quality of the research.
Thirty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria. Seventeen of these were high- or good-quality research studies, and the remaining 22 were non-research articles included with separate analysis as part of the scoping review. The 17 articles encompassed 2656 participants. The highest quality evidence indicated that standard surgical masks have the least impact on speech perception compared to other non-transparent mask types, and that recognizing emotions is less accurate with facemasks, necessitating compensatory actions (i.e., reducing extraneous noise, using a microphone to amplify voice, and employing clear speech). Evidence was contradictory regarding the use of transparent masks. Evidence was of limited quality for other non-verbal and verbal communication strategies.
Awareness of communication challenges is crucial when wearing facemasks. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate communication techniques when speakers are wearing facemasks. Basic strategies such as selecting an appropriate mask type, reducing extraneous noise, using microphones, verbalizing emotions, and employing clear speech appear to be beneficial.
The findings of this scoping review highlight the importance of considering communication challenges while wearing facemasks in the healthcare settings. The review suggests that selecting an appropriate mask type, reducing extraneous noise, verbalizing emotions, and employing clear speech are some strategies that may be effective in mitigating the impact of facemasks on communication between patients and healthcare providers.
摘要：
背景：口罩是一种重要的个人防护设备（PPE），可以减轻呼吸道疾病的传播，但它们会阻碍患者和医疗保健提供者之间的沟通。此范围审查的目的是确定戴口罩时的有效沟通方式。
方法：使用系统搜索PubMed的文章进行范围审查，CINAHL,和Embase数据库。
方法：PEO(人口，暴露,结果)方法被选择用于这项系统范围审查。感兴趣的人口(P)包括所有年龄段的人(儿童，成年人,和老年人)；感兴趣的暴露(E)是覆盖口腔的PPE(即，面罩)；兴趣的结果(O)是成功或不成功的沟通实践。约翰霍普金斯大学护士和医疗保健专业人员的循证实践评估指南用于确定研究的水平和质量。
结果：39篇符合纳入标准。其中17项是高质量或高质量的研究，其余22项为非研究文章,纳入单独分析作为范围审查的一部分.这17篇文章涵盖了2656名参与者。最高质量的证据表明，与其他非透明口罩类型相比，标准外科口罩对语音感知的影响最小。用口罩识别情绪不太准确，必要的补偿行动(即，减少外来噪音，用麦克风放大声音，并采用清晰的语言)。关于使用透明口罩的证据是矛盾的。其他非语言和语言交流策略的证据质量有限。
结论：佩戴口罩时，对沟通挑战的认识至关重要。需要更多高质量的研究来评估说话者戴口罩时的交流技术。基本策略，如选择适当的遮罩类型，减少外来噪音，使用麦克风，用言语表达情绪，使用清晰的语言似乎是有益的。
结论：本范围审查的结果强调了在医疗机构中佩戴口罩时考虑沟通挑战的重要性。评论建议选择合适的面罩类型，减少外来噪音，用言语表达情绪，采用清晰的语言是一些策略，可以有效减轻口罩对患者和医疗保健提供者之间沟通的影响。
方法：使用系统搜索PubMed的文章进行范围审查，CINAHL,和Embase数据库。
方法：PEO(人口，暴露,结果)方法被选择用于这项系统范围审查。感兴趣的人口(P)包括所有年龄段的人(儿童，成年人,和老年人)；感兴趣的暴露(E)是覆盖口腔的PPE(即，面罩)；兴趣的结果(O)是成功或不成功的沟通实践。约翰霍普金斯大学护士和医疗保健专业人员的循证实践评估指南用于确定研究的水平和质量。
结果：39篇符合纳入标准。其中17项是高质量或高质量的研究，其余22项为非研究文章,纳入单独分析作为范围审查的一部分.这17篇文章涵盖了2656名参与者。最高质量的证据表明，与其他非透明口罩类型相比，标准外科口罩对语音感知的影响最小。用口罩识别情绪不太准确，必要的补偿行动(即，减少外来噪音，用麦克风放大声音，并采用清晰的语言)。关于使用透明口罩的证据是矛盾的。其他非语言和语言交流策略的证据质量有限。
结论：佩戴口罩时，对沟通挑战的认识至关重要。需要更多高质量的研究来评估说话者戴口罩时的交流技术。基本策略，如选择适当的遮罩类型，减少外来噪音，使用麦克风，用言语表达情绪，使用清晰的语言似乎是有益的。
结论：本范围审查的结果强调了在医疗机构中佩戴口罩时考虑沟通挑战的重要性。评论建议选择合适的面罩类型，减少外来噪音，用言语表达情绪，采用清晰的语言是一些策略，可以有效减轻口罩对患者和医疗保健提供者之间沟通的影响。
