2004
Volume 43, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1573-9775
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1236

Abstract

Abstract

For many health care professionals, reporting is a daily, necessary task. Reports play a key role in the accountability practice of the care provided, like quality assurance, evaluation, coordination and continuity of health care. However, to write an efficient report in the Electronic Client Dossier (ECD) is not an easy task for professionals. Research illuminates that health care reports do not meet the required quality level, stressing the importance to address writing skills of these professionals.

In this study, consisting of 50 health reports of two mental health care organizations, we explore accountability practices of health care providers in reports. The analysis demonstrates how professionals actively give accounts for their performance at two levels, namely (1) the accounts for the accomplishment of mutual understanding and the unfolding of the institutional conversation and (2) the accounts for the directions of the health care process and/or future steps. These practices of ‘being accountable’ illuminate how the writing process of professionals is embedded in the institutional context of health care. Therefore, to improve the efficiency and quality of reports, it is crucial to train the strategic competence of professionals instead of just training writing skills.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2021.2.006.YOUN
2021-11-01
2021-12-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/15739775/43/2/06_TVT2021.2_YOUN.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2021.2.006.YOUN&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alter, C., & Adkins, C.(2001). Improving the writing skills of social work students. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(3), 493-505.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, C., & Webb, J.(2019). When the larger objective matters more: support workers’ epistemic and deontic authority over adult service‐users. Sociology of health & illness, 41(8), 1549-1567.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baarda, D. B., De Goede, M. P. M., & Theunissen, J.(2001). Basisboek Kwalitatief onderzoek: Praktische handleiding voor het opzetten en uitvoeren van kwalitatief onderzoek. Groningen: Noordhoff Uitgevers.
  4. Brancheorganisaties Zorg(2017). Governancecode Zorg. Utrecht: BoZ.
  5. Brinkman, G. W., & van der Geest, T. M.(2003). Assessment of communication competencies in engineering design projects. Technical communication quarterly, 12(1), 67-81.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Buschenhenke, F.(2016). Het literaire werk anno 2016 Digitale schrijfprocessen vastleggen en analyseren. Vooys, 34 (4).
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Charldorp, van, T. C.(2014). “What happened?” From talk to text in police interrogations. Language & Communication, 36, 7-24.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F.(1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive science, 13(2), 259-294.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, H. H., Schreuder, R., & Buttrick, S.(1983). Common ground at the understanding of demonstrative reference. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 22(2), 245-258.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Clayman, S. E.(1990). From talk to text: Newspaper accounts of reporter-source interactions. Media, Culture & Society, 12(1), 79-103.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Eliacin, J., Salyers, M. P., Kukla, M., & Matthias, M. S.(2015). Patients’ understanding of shared decision making in a mental health setting. Qualitative health research, 25(5), 668-678.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Erickson, F., & Shultz, J. (1982). The Counselor as Gatekeeper: Social Interaction in Interviews. New York: Academic Press.
  13. Faber-de Lange, B., & Pool, van der, E.(2015). De communicatief competente professional in de ogen van managers: een kwalitatieve exploratie als input voor curriculumontwikkeling. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 37(2), 217-239.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Goodwin, J.(1998). Forms of authority and the real ad verecundiam. Argumentation, 12(2), 267-280.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Graaff, de, K., Donkers, E., Onrust, I.(2017). Verantwoord Rapporteren voor hulp- en dienstverlening. Groningen/Houten: Noordhoff Uitgevers.
  16. Gramsbergen-Hoogland, Y. & Molen, H., van der(2017). Gesprekken in organisaties.Groningen/Houten: Noordhoff Uitgevers.
  17. Harvey, V. S.(2006). Variables affecting the clarity of psychological reports. Journal of Clinical Psychology62(1), 5-18.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Heritage, J.(1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 299-345.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Holt, E., & Clift, R.(Eds.). (2006). Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction (Vol. 24). Cambridge University Press.
  20. Horst, ter, J.(2018). Rapporteren in de zorg en hulpverlening. Bussum: Coutinho.
  21. Hyland, K., & Tse, P.(2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied linguistics, 25(2), 156177.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Janssen, D.(1991). Schrijven aan beleidsnota‘s: schrijfprocessen van beleidsambtenaren empirisch-kwalitatief onderzocht. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
  23. Jönsson, L., & Linell, P.(1991). Story generations: From dialogical interviews to written reports in police interrogations. Text-Interdisciplinary journal for the study of discourse, 11(3), 419-440.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kennisportal(2021). De voor- en nadelen van het ECD. Geraadpleegd op 29 maart, 2021 van: https://www.kennisportal.com/kennisitems/onderzoek-naar-de-inzet-van-en-tevredenheid-over-het-ecd/
  25. Komter, M.(2012). The career of a suspect’s statement: Talk, text, context. Discourse Studies, 14(6), 731-752.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kuiper, C., Smit, J., De Wachter, L., & Elen, J.(2017). Scaffolding tertiary students’ writing in a genre based writing intervention. Journal of Writing Research, 9(1), 27-59.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., Schriver, K., & Hayes, J. R.(2013). Writing in the workplace: Constructing documents using multiple digital sources. Journal of Writing Research, 5 (3), 285-337.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Matarese, M. T., & Caswell, D.(2018). ‘I’m Gonna Ask You about Yourself, so I Can Put It on Paper’: Analysing Street-Level Bureaucracy through Form-Related Talk in Social Work. British Journal of Social Work, 48(3), 714-733.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Michaels, M. H.(2006). Ethical considerations in writing psychological assessment reports. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(1), 47-58.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Mondada, L. (2011a). Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequential achievement in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(2), 542-552.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Mondada, L. (2011b). The management of knowledge discrepancies and of epistemic changes in institutional interactions. The morality of knowledge in conversation, 27-57.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Nelson, P., & Weatherald, C.(2014). Cracking the code—An approach to developing professional writing skills. Social work education, 33(1), 105-120.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Nursing (nov 2017). ‘Meer zorg, minder papier’. Top vijf registratie-ergernissen in de verpleging. Geraadpleegd van: https://www.nursing.nl/top-vijf-registratie-ergernissen-in-de-verpleging/
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Pool, van der, E., & Vonk, F.(2008). Communicatieve competentie van hbo-studenten: een model voor het ontwikkelen van een doorlopende leerlijn. Levende Talen Tijdschrift, 9(3), 21-29.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Potter, J., & Edwards, D.(1996). Discourse analysis. Introducing psychological research, 419-425). Palgrave, London.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Raad voor Volksgezondheid & Samenleving(2019). Blijk van vertrouwen. Anders verantwoorden voor goede zorg. Den Haag: RVS.
  37. Schegloff, E. A.(1968). Sequencing in conversational openings 1. American anthropologist, 70(6), 1075-1095.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Searle, J. R.(1962). Meaning and speech acts. The philosophical review, 71(4), 423-432.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Silverman, D.(2015). Interpreting qualitative data. London: Sage Publications.
  40. Slade, M.(2017). Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care. World psychiatry, 16(2), 146-153.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Sliedrecht, K.Y. & Charldorp, van, T.C.(2011). Tussen spraak en schrift: de rol van samenvattingen in het politieverhoor. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 31(1), 34-55.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Sliedrecht, K.Y., Pool, van der, E., Klein Breteler, G., Leseman, L.(2020). Efficiënt rapporteren in de zorg: herontwerp van het ECD. ICT & Health6, 71-73.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Sluiters, J., Mast, N.Van der, Pool, E. van der(2019). Schrijfwerk in uitvoering: een onderzoek naar schrijfprocessen van hbo-professionals als input voor curriculumontwikkeling. Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs37, 2-3.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Verpleegkundigen & Verzorgenden Nederland(2011). Richtlijn verpleegkundige en verzorgende verslaglegging. Utrecht: V&VN.
  45. Verpleegkundigen & Verzorgenden Nederland(2018). Meer zorg, minder papier. Resultaten enquête. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen.
  46. Wachter, R. M.(2013). Personal accountability in healthcare: searching for the right balance. BMJ quality & safety, 22(2), 176-180.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Woody, J. D., Zeleny, M. G., D’Souza, H. J., Harder, J., Reiser, J., & Szto, P.(2014). Student progress in a social work writing course: Self-efficacy, course objectives, and skills. Journal of Social Work Education, 50(3), 507-524.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2021.2.006.YOUN
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2021.2.006.YOUN
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error