Dataset Information

Whose centre is it anyway? Defining person-centred care in nursing: An integrative review.

ABSTRACT: AIM:The aims of this literature review were to better understand the current literature about person-centred care (PCC) and identify a clear definition of the term PCC relevant to nursing practice. METHOD/DATA SOURCES:An integrative literature review was undertaken using The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, Scopus and Pubmed databases. The limitations were English language, full text articles published between 1998 and 2018 within Australian, New Zealand, Canada, USA, Europe, Ireland and UK were included. The international context off PCC is then specifically related to the Australian context. REVIEW METHODS:The review adopted a thematic analysis to categorise and summarise themes with reference to the concept of PCC. The review process also adhered to the Preferred Reporting System for Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and applied the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tools to ensure the quality of the papers included for deeper analysis. RESULTS:While definitions of PCC do exist, there is no universally used definition within the nursing profession. This review has found three core themes which contribute to how PCC is understood and practiced, these are People, Practice and Power. This review uncovered a malalignment between the concept of PCC and the operationalisation of the term; this misalignment was discovered at both the practice level, and at the micro, meso and micro levels of the healthcare service. CONCLUSION:The concept of PCC is well known to nurses, yet ill-defined and operationalised into practice. PCC is potentially hindered by its apparent rhetorical nature, and further investigation of how PCC is valued and operationalised through its measurement and reported outcomes is needed. Investigation of the literature found many definitions of PCC, but no one universally accepted and used definition. Subsequently, PCC remains conceptional in nature, leading to disparity between how it is interpreted and operationalised within the healthcare system and within nursing services.

SUBMITTER: Byrne AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7064187 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Whose centre is it anyway? Defining person-centred care in nursing: An integrative review.

Byrne Amy-Louise AL Baldwin Adele A Harvey Clare C

PloS one 20200310 3

<h4>Aim</h4>The aims of this literature review were to better understand the current literature about person-centred care (PCC) and identify a clear definition of the term PCC relevant to nursing practice.<h4>Method/data sources</h4>An integrative literature review was undertaken using The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, Scopus and Pubmed databases. The limitations were English language, full text articles published between 1998 and 2018 within Austral ...[more]

PMID: 32155182

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMealtime is a critical daily activity to ensure nutrition, hydration, function and socialisation. Interactions between staff and residents during mealtimes are complex and dynamic processes including verbal and/or nonverbal communication that can be positive/neutral or challenging. This study examined characteristics of and relationships between person-centred and task-centred care and positive/neutral and challenging mealtime behaviours in persons with dementia.MethodsThis study was a secondary behavioural analyses of videotaped mealtime observations (n = 110) involving 42 unique staff-resident dyads (29 staff and 25 residents with dementia) in nine nursing homes. The refined Cue Utilization and Engagement in Dementia mealtime video-coding scheme was used to code videos during 2019-2020. Dependent variables representing resident mealtime behaviours included positive verbal behaviours, positive/neutral nonverbal behaviours, functional impairments (nonverbal) and resistive behaviours (verbal and nonverbal). Independent variables were staff person-centred and task-centred approaches (verbal and nonverbal). Relationships between resident mealtime behaviours and staff approaches were examined using bivariate analysis and logistic regression.ResultsStaff person-centred verbal approaches were associated with resident positive verbal behaviours (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.09-1.76), functional impairments (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66-1.00) and resistive behaviours (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.18-2.31). Staff person-centred nonverbal approaches were associated with resident functional impairments (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.02-1.74). Staff task-centred approaches were not associated with resident positive/neutral or challenging mealtime behaviours.ConclusionThis study characterised staff approaches and resident behaviours during mealtime care and provided preliminary support on associations between staff person-centred approaches and resident positive and challenging behaviours. Person-centred mealtime care practice is recommended by focusing on support of common, challenging behaviours and reinforcement of positive behaviours with adequate consideration of individual needs and preferences.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To explore how nurses in hospitals enact person-centred fundamental care delivery. BACKGROUND:Effective person-centred care is at the heart of fundamental nursing care, but it is deemed to be challenging in acute health care as there is a strong biomedical focus and most nurses are not trained in person-centred fundamental care delivery. We therefore need to know if and how nurses currently incorporate a person-centred approach during fundamental care. DESIGN:Focused ethnography approach. METHODS:Observations of 30 nurses on three different wards in two Dutch hospitals during their morning shift. Data were collected through passive observations and analysed using framework analysis based on the fundamentals of care framework. The COREQ guideline was used for reporting. RESULTS:Some nurses successfully integrate physical, psychosocial and relational elements of care in patient interactions. However, most nurses were observed to be mainly focused on physical care and did not take the time at their patients' bedside to care for their psychosocial and relational needs. Many had a task-focused way of working and communicating, seldom incorporating patients' needs and experiences or discussing care planning, and often disturbing each other. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that although some nurses manage to do so, person-centred fundamental care delivery remains a challenge in hospitals, as most nurses have a task-focused approach and therefore do not manage to integrate the physical, relational and physical elements of care. For further improvement, attention needs to be paid to integrated fundamental care and clinical reasoning skills. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE:Although most nurses have a compassionate approach, this study shows that nurses do not incorporate psychosocial care or encourage patient participation when helping patients with their physical fundamental care needs, even though there seems to be sufficient opportunity for them to do so.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The literature suggests that person-centred care can contribute to quality of life and wellbeing of nursing home residents, relatives and staff. However, there is sparse research evidence on how person-centred care can be operationalised and implemented in practice, and the extent to which it may promote wellbeing and satisfaction. Therefore, the U-Age nursing home study was initiated to deepen the understanding of how to integrate person-centred care into daily practice and to explore the effects and meanings of this. METHODS:The study aims to evaluate effects and meanings of a person-centred and thriving-promoting intervention in nursing homes through a multi-centre, non-equivalent controlled group before-after trial design. Three nursing homes across three international sites have been allocated to a person-centred and thriving-promoting intervention group, and three nursing homes have been allocated to an inert control group. Staff at intervention sites will participate in a 12-month interactive educational programme that operationalises thriving-promoting and person-centred care three dimensions: 1) Doing a little extra, 2) Developing a caring environment, and 3) Assessing and meeting highly prioritised psychosocial needs. A pedagogical framework will guide the intervention. The primary study endpoints are; residents' thriving, relatives' satisfaction with care and staff job satisfaction. Secondary endpoints are; resident, relative and staff experiences of the caring environment, relatives' experience of visiting their relative and the nursing home, as well as staff stress of conscience and perceived person-centredness of care. Data on study endpoints will be collected pre-intervention, post-intervention, and at a six-month follow up. Interviews will be conducted with relatives and staff to explore experiences and meanings of the intervention. DISCUSSION:The study is expected to provide evidence that can inform further research, policy and practice development on if and how person-centred care may improve wellbeing, thriving and satisfaction for people who reside in, visit or work in nursing homes. The combination of quantitative and qualitative data will illuminate the operationalisation, effects and meaning of person-centred and thriving-promoting care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov March 19, 2016, identifier NCT02714452 .

Project description:BackgroundAgitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost.Methods and findingsThis was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen's D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI -7.39, -1.15; Cohen's D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI -7.07,-2.02; Cohen's D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen's D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62237498.

Dataset Information

Whose centre is it anyway? Defining person-centred care in nursing: An integrative review.

Publications

Whose centre is it anyway? Defining person-centred care in nursing: An integrative review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets