護理人員人際衝突來源與衝突處理型態之探討

本研究旨在瞭解臨床護理人員面對不同人際衝突來源時衝突的處理型態。使用橫斷式調查研究方法，以立意取樣，針對在醫院工作且通過試用期，服務滿六個月領有護理師證照者為本研究樣本。本研究通過醫院IRB審核，研究工具為結構式之問卷「人際衝突來源量表」與「衝突處理型態量表」，等進行資料收集，採專家效度內在一致性檢定Cranach’s α值為.70，再測信度γ值為.71。以描述性統計包括：個數、百分比、平均值及標準差；推論性統計包括：Pearson積差相關分析與變異數分析（one-way ANOVA）進行資料分析，收案期間為2014年3月5 日至3月22日，共發出問卷250 份，回收250 份，問卷有效回收率為100％。研究結果顯示： 1. 護理人員整體人際衝突來源平均值為2.44（標準差0.71），各構面平均值以「溝通因素」構面最高為2.56（標準差0.73），以「個人因素」平均值最低為2.33（標準差0.69）。 2. 護理人員整體衝突處理型態平均值為3.09 （標準差0.68），各種不同之處理衝突型態中，最常使用衝突處理型態為「整合」，平均值為3.33，「支配」衝突處理型態使用最少，平均值為2.56。 3. 護理人員人際衝突來源與衝突處理型態相關性中，護理人員「溝通人際衝突」、「組織人際衝突」及「個人人際衝突」與「支配型衝突處理型態」達顯著正相關(r=.232，P<0.01；r=.2.41，P<0.01；r=.272，P<0.01)。 4. 護理人員基本屬性與衝突處理型態相關性，除了「性別」、「教育程度」、「工作年資」、「單位科別」、「健康狀態」及「最近一年內曾參與衝突處理的在職教育課程」無顯著之相關，其它的「年齡」與「整合型衝突處理型態」(r=.127，P<0.05)；「能力進階」與「支配型、妥協型」衝突處理型態 (r=.138，P<0.05；r=.154，P<0.05) 達顯著正相關；「婚姻」與「整合型、妥協型、逃避型及讓步型」衝突處理型態達顯著負相關(r=-.155、r=-.144、r=-.131、r=-.131，P<0.01)。本研究結果發現護理人員人際衝突來源會受到不同因素而有不同處理方式，建議除了在學術上能提供相關護理人員人際衝突來源與與衝突處理型態知識外，定期舉辦衝突處理情境演練及強化溝通技巧，在實務的工作上可做為各醫療院所之護理主管，作為改善護理人員人際衝突之參考依據。關鍵字：護理人員、人際衝突來源、衝突處理型態

關鍵字

護理人員；人際衝突來源；衝突處理型態

並列摘要

Objective：The purpose of this study is to explore if nurses use different approaches to manage conflicts when they encounter different sources of interpersonal conflicts. Methods：The study employed cross-sectional method and purposive sampling. Subjects were certificated nurses with more than six months of practice experience recruited from a regional hospital in northern Taiwan. This design passed the audit through the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the hospital and hospital agreement in data collection. Self-designed and structured questionnaires as“The Sources of Interpersonal Conflict Scale " and“The Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict Scale”were used for data collection. The expert content validity and internal consistency indicated that these instruments were valid and reliable (Cranach's α=0.70；γ=0.71). Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics including number、percentage、mean and standard deviation, and inferential statistics including Pearson correlation and one-way ANOVA. From 2014 March 5 to March 22, a total of 250 questionnaires were recruited and 250 questionnaires were returned. The effective rate was 100%. Results：1. The mean score of overall sources of interpersonal conflict in nurses was M=2.44(SD = 0.71). Communicating factors (M=2.56；SD=0.73) revealed the highest score among subscales, whereas personal factors (M=2.33；SD = 0.69) was the lowest. 2. The mean score of overall conflict management in nurses was M=3.09 (SD=0.68). The most common strategy used by the participants for conflict management was integrating (M =3.33). In contrast, the least used style was dominating (M = 2.56). 3. There are positive correlation between dominating conflict management and communicating、organization and personal interpersonal conflict(r=.232，P<0.01；r=.2.41，P<0.01；r=.272，P<0.01).4. The nurses' gender, education, seniority, department, physical condition and participating in conflict management courses in the last year had no significant correlation with any styles of conflict management. There are positive correlations between age and integrating conflict management(r=.127，P<0.05)；clinical ladder and dominating(r=.138，P<0.05)、compromising conflict management」(r=.154，P<0.05). In addition, marriage and integrating conflict management、compromising conflict management、avoiding conflict management and obliging conflict management have negative correlation(r = -.155，P<0.01；r = -.144，P<0.01、r = -.131，P<0.01；r = -.131，P<0.01).Conclusions：The Nurses interpersonal source of conflict will be handled in different ways and management in addition to providing nursing-related sources of conflict and interpersonal conflict management patterns and knowledge, nurses can provide improved interpersonal conflict reference.