Using a Mixed-Methods Needs Analysis to Ensure the Sustainability and Success of English for Nursing Communication Courses: Improving Nurse-Patient Engagement Practices in Globalized Health Care

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article entitled: Enhancing Nursing Engagement Practice through an ESP Communication Course: a Mixed-Methods Needs Analysis, is a correct contribution to the academic field. The contribution is well structured and has the sections required by the scientific community. However, from the evaluator's point of view it has a number of weaknesses which should be remedied. Firstly, it is intended to be included in a monograph focusing on Higher Education, but except in the summary, there is no clear development and framing of the proposal in the aforementioned field in the body of the text. On the other hand, given the nature and purpose of the journal, it would have been convenient, given the nature and purpose of the journal, to situate the contribution within the 2030 agenda and relate it to the Sustainable Development Goals. 

Although the training of nurses in communication is relevant, the proposal is very vague and does not include key concepts such as, for example, communicative competence (Hymes, 1971). The impact of nurses' initial or continuing education indicated in point 1.3 Teaching Engagement in ESP Nursing Communication is poorly developed when it is one of the key elements of the proposal. Methodologically, the period of application of the observation is very short (one week); similarly, the fact of analysing only the communicative behaviour of a single nurse reduces the possibility of contrasting with other professionals. It should also be pointed out that section 3.4 Post-Observation Comments is short in its length and could have been shown in greater depth, indicating explicit responses from the nurse interviewed. The conclusions reached are somewhat lax: These obstacles suggest that it is difficult but necessary to teach nurses empathetic communication skills, lacking a greater transposition to the field of Higher Education with specific proposals.

Consequently, it is an article with a certain potential but which, from the evaluator's point of view, would require a profound remodelling, taking into account all of the above, in order to be considered. That is to say, a more elaborate contextualisation in the field of Higher Education, improvement of the participants involved as well as the time taken to collect information, better use and analysis of the data from interviews and a better formulation - more oriented - of the discussion and conclusions so that the impact of communication strategies and tools in the training of nurses can be better verified.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is an interesting one and I believe it can be of value to potential readers. It is generally well written and I would suggest the acceptance of the paper.

Author Response

Thank you for the opportunity to submit our revised manuscript. We sincerely appreciate your valuable feedback and comments. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors

 

Communication with the patient - healthcare professionals is an extremely important aspect of working with the patient. That is why it is so important to undertake research in this area.

However, I am afraid this study has insufficient methodological foundations and does not allow concluding.

The qualitative study was based solely on the observation of the work of one (!)  nurse with one (!) patient. It does not allow for verification if other communication practices are used by other nurses or patients, which means that it does not saturate the data.

I state that the study requires more data to be collected to be published.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This is interesting and poignant research. As the conduit between medical specialist and patient the nurse’s role involves communication in different registers. This research demonstrates that an experienced nurse develops empathy and rapport with the patient, through the nurse’s and patient’s mutual second language, English. The researchers discuss and conclude that engagement strategies and patient communication should be included in nurses’ training courses.

 

The research questions and methodology are clear and well-suited for this study.

 

I would be interested to see a comparative SFL study of nurses’ communication with patients in their native language and their communication in a second language.

 

I congratulate the researchers on this study and look forward to reading more of their work.

 

A few minor observations:

 

Cited references, there is an extensive list of references that provide evidence for the need and benefit of this research.

 

1. I could not find a full copy of reference 18 which is cited at line 58 for diabetes but the article title states is about oncology.

18. Bredart, A.; Bouleuc, C.; Dolbeault, S. Doctor-patient communication and satisfaction with care in oncology. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 572 2005, 17, 351–354; DOI:10.1097/01.cco.0000167734.26454.30

 

2. Reference 41 is listed in a sentence about what is taught in nursing courses. The reference title does not refer to nursing.

 

41. Malekan, F.; Hajimohammadi, R. The relationship between Iranian ESP learners’ translation ability and resilience in reading 621 comprehension. Int. J. Educ. Lit. Stud. 2017, 5, 47–52; DOI:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.47

 

 

English language syntax

Research Questions:

These are very clear.

 

Question 1 needs the verb after ‘how’ to make it a question rather than a statement.

 

1.     How is engagement actually practiced by a hospital nurse in nursing communication?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

After a thorough revision of the text, the authors have reformulated the title and summary to better adapt it to the monograph. They have better developed the concepts related to communicative competence, which is one of the most important aspects of the contribution. The methodological section has been better developed and justified, as well as expanding the information in those sections that had been underdeveloped. Consequently, the article has changed considerably and, if considered by the editor, could be proposed for acceptance in the journal.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors

Thank you for the extensive explanation. You carefully modified the manuscript with additional important corrections.

 

A change in the conclusion section also clears the doubts about the article.

In this form, I do not have any comments, and I state this manuscript is ready for publication in its present form.