Feminism and nursing have historically travelled separate paths. Nursing has only recently begun to embrace feminist philosophy, and consequently nurse researchers are just beginning to undertake truly feminist research. There appears to be little consensus between feminist researchers' interpretations of the concepts of method and methodology. Prior to embarking on the development of a feminist research proposal it is imperative to differentiate between these two concepts. This paper explores the concepts of method and methodology and explains their interrelationship. Feminist research methodology, with its emphasis on a non-hierarchical, reflexive, interactive approach is highlighted and its impact on the researcher's choice of an appropriate method is discussed. It is only through addressing these issues that nurse researchers will be effective in pursuing truly feminist research that can act as a catalyst for the emancipation of women and the nursing profession.
Objectives: To determine UK pharmacists’ experiences of their current communication skills and undergraduate training and to identify communication skills training and teaching at UK schools of pharmacy. Methods: Two surveys were developed. The first survey was sent to UK practicing pharmacists examining their current communication skills and interest in behavioural counselling techniques such as Motivational Interviewing (MI). A second survey was sent to all UK Schools of Pharmacy investigating communication skills training and teaching. Results: In the first survey pharmacists reported low satisfaction with their undergraduate communication skills training. A convenience sample of 109 UK pharmacists responded to the first survey. Forty-four per cent (n = 48) of the respondents stated that they continued their professional development in communication skills after an undergraduate degree. Seventy (65.4%) were not familiar with behavioural counselling techniques such as MI. The most common patient consultation delivered by pharmacists was around adherence to medicine 22.4% (n = 50). Pharmacists expressed a need for further training in clinical areas such as mental health 25.7% (n = 80). Results from the second survey to pharmacy schools showed that Schools of Pharmacy response rate was 60% (18/30). All 18 schools stated that they teach health behaviour change consultation skills and this is mostly delivered by a clinical pharmacist. Teaching communication skills was mostly delivered as role play with peers (n = 17). Conclusion: This first national survey of communication skills training in Schools of Pharmacy shows that newer graduates have received more communication training compared to older graduates, however pharmacists’ respondents still felt that they were under prepared for behaviour change patient consultations. MI training would be welcomed by those. Practice Implications: Structured courses in communication skills, including behavioural change techniques, are needed for practicing UK pharmacists.
One‐stop clinics have shown to improve the patient experience in early diagnosis of potentially life threatening conditions, although this service is less evident in Urology, where morbidity and mortality resulting from bladder cancers are increasing. This study will discuss whether or not one‐stop haematuria clinics improve patient satisfaction. A survey analysis comparing patient satisfaction for a one‐stop haematuria clinic and a traditional outpatient service was developed, based around the ‘Determinants and Components’ theory. A convenience sample of 102 haematuria patients attending either the one‐stop clinic (Route A) or an outpatient clinic within the Urology service (Route B), at an assigned National Health Service hospital, were invited to complete a ‘patient satisfaction’ questionnaire. Data were compared between clinic routes according to the patient satisfaction themes of: Time and Availability, Quality of Care, Environment, Accessibility and Convenience and Global Satisfaction. Response rate was 51%; with overall positive patient satisfaction levels for both clinics. Route A patients were most satisfied with Quality of Care; however, reported problems relating to prior information provision and appointment co‐ordination. For Route B, Availability and Time was a primary source of both satisfaction and dissatisfaction, receiving contradictory qualitative and quantitative responses respectively. Both groups rated Environment and Accessibility and Convenience highly overall, yet these were not a primary determinant of satisfaction. The majority of haematuria patients (82%), expressed a preference to attend a one‐stop clinic over several outpatient appointments. Practical recommendations for related service improvements are offered.
Haematuria has a prevalence of 0.1% to 2.6%. Potential diagnoses may include infection, kidney stones, trauma, exercise or spurious causes, such as foods, drugs or menstruation, and a tumour. Approximately 20% of patients with haematuria have a urological tumour, with a further 20% found to have a significant underlying pathology. Haematuria is subsequently known as the 'classic presentation' of bladder cancer with 70-80% of patients experiencing painless, gross (visible) haematuria. However, in all cases of visible haematuria, a tumour should be suspected until proven otherwise. A patient with visible haematuria requires urgent, stringent investigation, warranting specialist assessment and subsequent selective referral through a series of patient-centred investigations at a haematuria clinic. One-stop clinics have been shown to improve the patient experience in early diagnosis of potentially life-threatening conditions. Yet despite morbidity and mortality from bladder cancer increasing, the haematuria service has remained largely unchanged for several decades. This paper will discuss the tests and investigations that need to be undertaken in an individual with either visible or non-visible haematuria, and outline the care that is needed to support patients through the investigation process, with special focus on bladder tumour.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.