Search

Background: Patient‐centred care has been recognised as vital for today's healthcare quality. This type of care puts patients at the centre, contributing to positive patient outcomes such as patient autonomy. Empirical research comparing nurses' and patients' perceptions of the support and provision of patient‐centred care is limited and focuses solely on nurses and patients working and staying on surgical wards. Aims and objectives: Comparing patients' and nurses' perceptions of patient‐centred care on different types of hospital wards, and exploring if patient empowerment, health literacy, and certain sociodemographic and context‐related variables are associated with these perceptions. Design: Cross‐sectional design. Methods: Data were collected in ten Flemish (February–June 2016) and two Dutch (December 2014–May 2015) hospitals using the Individualised Care Scale (ICS). A linear mixed model was fitted. Data from 845 patients and 569 nurses were analysed. As the ICS was used to measure the concept of patient‐centred care, it is described using the term 'individualised care.' Results: Nurses perceived that they supported and provided individualised care more compared with patients as they scored significantly higher on the ICS compared with patients. Patients with higher empowerment scores, higher health literacy, a degree lower than bachelor, a longer hospital stay, and patients who were employed and who were admitted to Dutch hospitals scored significantly higher on some of the ICS subscales/subsections. Nurses who were older and more experienced and those working in Dutch hospitals, regional hospitals and maternity wards scored significantly higher on some of the ICS subscales/subsections. Conclusion: Nurses perceived that they supported and provided individualised care more compared with patients. Relevance to clinical practice: Creating a shared understanding towards the support and provision of individualised care should be a priority as this could generate more effective nursing care that takes into account the individuality of the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To gain insight into which elements of the interpersonal care relationship (IPCR) are perceived as occurring (less) frequently and as (not) disturbing from the perspective of hospitalized older patients. Design A cross‐sectional study in three Belgian hospitals. Methods: A convenience sample of patients aged 75 years or older admitted to a non‐geriatric ward were recruited between May 2017 and April 2019. The Interpersonal Geriatric care relationship (InteGer) tool was used to identify elements of the IPCR and was completed by the researchers through structured patient interviews. Results: The mean total scale score for frequency was 3.74 (SD 1.51) [range 0–12]. On subscale level, the highest mean score was in the accessibility and the lowest mean score in the humanization subscale. Statistically significant differences between the hypothesized and experienced disturbance were observed in 18 of the 30 items. Ten items score in the category 'no action needed' (not occurring, not disturbing), nine items in the category 'remain attentive for patient experiences' (occurring, not disturbing), 10 items in the category 'further analyses or monitoring needed' (not occurring, disturbing) and one item in the category 'urgent action needed' (occurring and disturbing). Conclusion: Participants report mostly positive experiences related to the four subscales of the InteGer, that is, humanization, attentiveness, interest and accessibility. Insights from this study provide important opportunities in the context of care optimization for each category with the main focus on items with high experienced disturbance. Impact The InteGer can be used for monitoring IPCR and formulating action points at ward and hospital level to further improve the IPCR and quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To develop and psychometrically test the Interpersonal Geriatric care relationship tool. Background: The quality of nursing care is highly influenced by the quality of the interpersonal care relationship, yet there are no tools available that capture the conceptual breadth of the interpersonal care relationship. Design: Instrument development and psychometric testing of the content and construct validity, factor structure and reliability. Methods: A four-phased validation procedure was conducted (January 2016-April 2019): defining the construct measured by the tool, tool development, content validation and psychometric evaluation. Results: The 30-item Interpersonal Geriatric care relationship tool was subjected to exploratory factor analysis. Four components (humanization, attentiveness, interest and accessibility) were extracted. The tool demonstrated discriminating power and good internal consistency. Cronbach's alphas for the components ranged between 0.69 and 0.84. Conclusion: The Interpersonal Geriatric care relationship tool is a valuable measure that can be used by scientists, educators and healthcare professionals to benchmark the interpersonal care relationship culture in hospitals and optimize the quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]