Sufficiency and relevance of information for inpatients in general ward settings: A qualitative exploration of information exchange between patients and nurses

Patients' expectations of and experiences with psychosocial care needs in perioperative nursing: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Meeting inpatients' psychosocial care needs is essential for their wellbeing, recovery, and positive experiences. This study aimed to describe and compare surgical inpatients' subjective perceptions of the importance of fundamental psychosocial and overall care received.

METHODS

A descriptive study with a convenient sample was conducted from September 2019 to April 2020. A total of 194 surgical inpatients from Norway and Denmark answered a perioperative user participation questionnaire on the day of discharge. The questionnaire was previously face- and content validated. The questionnaire assessed patients' sociodemographic characteristics and four dimensions of fundamental care domains: Psychosocial, Relational, Physical, and System level. This study reports the results from the psychosocial domain. Descriptive statistics including frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations were used to analyze background information variables. The congruency between participants' expectations of and experiences with psychosocial care is presented.

RESULTS

The inpatients expected (and experienced) the healthcare personnel to treat them with respect and dignity, and to be involved and informed throughout their perioperative care. The average ratings regarding these aspects of psychosocial care needs were 72.1-93.8%. There was congruency between patients' perceptions of the subjective importance (SI) of psychosocial fundamental care and their perceived reality (PR) of care. Congruency between high SI and high PR ranged from 59.1 to 92.2%, and congruency between low SI and low PR ranged from 0 to 6.6%. Incongruency between SI and PR varied between 5.9 and 39.6% and was mainly related to higher PR than SI. We found no association between education level, sex, length of stay, age, and patient expectations of or experiences with psychosocial care needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical inpatients in Norway and Denmark experience respectful and dignified treatment, and they feel involved and informed in their perioperative care. It is important to include patient perspectives in further research to avoid missed care and disconnection between what patients prefer and what healthcare personnel plan to do. Understanding patient preferences might also lead to less stress and workload for healthcare personnel.

The effect of shared decision-making on recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain in primary care; a post-hoc analysis from the patient, physician and observer perspectives

Background

Although shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly accepted in healthcare and has demonstrated merits for several psychological outcomes, the effect on recovery from somatic conditions is still subject to debate. The objective of this study is to measure the effect of SDM on recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain (LBP).

Methods

This study is a post-hoc analysis of data from a cluster-randomised trial that evaluated the effectiveness of SDM on recovery in patients with non-chronic aspecific LBP. In this analysis, we re-evaluate the impact of SDM from three perspectives: that of external observers, participating GPs and participating patients. Recovery was measured with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain and with the Roland Morris Disability questionnaire (RMD) and defined as a VAS < 30 and an RMD < 4. Logistic regression was used to analyse the effect of SDM on recovery at 6 and 26 weeks.

Results

At 26 weeks, 105 (74%) of all 176 included patients had recovered. No significant effect of SDM on recovery at 6 or 26 weeks after the consultation was found when considering SDM from an observer perspective or a patient perspective. From a GP perspective SDM had a significant effect on recovery, but at 26 weeks only, and with the lowest probability of recovery observed at a medium level of GP-perceived SDM.

Conclusions

We found no evidence that SDM as perceived by the patient or by external observation improves recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain. The long-term recovery may be better for patients in whom the GP perceives SDM during their consultations. Further research should highlight the hierarchy and the relation between the perspectives, which is needed to come to an integral effect evaluation of SDM.

Trial registration

The Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR) number: NTR1960.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01624-y.

'I'll put up with things for a long time before I need to call anybody': Face work, the Total Institution and the perpetuation of care inequalities

Failures in fundamental care (e.g. nutrition or pain-relief) for hospitalised patients can have serious consequences, including avoidable deaths. Policy rhetoric of 'shared decision-making' fails to consider how structural constraints and power dynamics limit patient agency in nursing staff-patient interactions. Goffman's concepts of face work, the presentation of self and the Total Institution shaped our analysis of interview and focus group data from hospital patients. Patients avoided threatening 'good' patient and staff face by only requesting missed care when staff face was convincing as 'caring' and 'available' ('engaged'). Patients did not request care from 'distracted' staff ('caring' but not 'available'), whilst patient requests were ignored in Total Institution-like 'dismissive' interactions. This meant patients experienced missed care with both 'distracted' and 'dismissive' staff. Patients with higher support needs were less able to carry out their own missed care to protect staff face, so experienced more serious care omissions. These findings show that many elements of the Total Institution survive in modern healthcare settings despite attempts to support individualised care. Unless nursing staff can maintain face as 'engaged' (despite organisational constraints that can reduce their capacity to do so) patient participation in care decisions will remain at the level of rhetoric.

Patients' perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore patient perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were used to explore patient perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted from July to August 2017 with a purposive sample of twenty patients using halfway houses. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis of the interviews identified two themes: barriers to shared decision making; facilitators of shared decision making. Patients perceived that they were not involved in decision making due to: the professional status of health professionals; negative perception of making decisions; and limited time resources. However, patients reported a desire to be involved and felt sufficient information exchange would be a necessary step towards collaboration/sharing decisions about treatment with clinicians.

CONCLUSION

The findings provided an understanding of significant barriers to and facilitators of implementing shared decision making to aid further professional training and the development of national policies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings could be the basis for developing effective strategies to overcome barriers to shared decision making and improve the process quality of delivering shared decision making.