Dataset Information

Factors Influencing Trust and Trustworthiness: Cosmetic Injectable Patient Experience Exploratory Study (CIPEES)—Part 3

ABSTRACT: Abstract

Background

Despite the widely recognized importance of trust in professional relationships, it remains elusive, complex, multidimensional, and difficult to quantify due to the lack of validated tools.

Objectives

The authors sought to explore both the important factors for building trust with cosmetic injectable patients and strategies for improving levels of trustworthiness in aesthetic practitioners.

Methods

In order to explore factors in building trust with cosmetic injectable practitioners, a global study was conducted via an online survey. The Cosmetic Injectable Patient Experience Exploratory Study (CIPEES) survey assessed the relative importance of qualifications and training; reviewing of previous work (before and after photos); reputation; connection; time spent; online presence; and personal appearance of the practitioner in developing trust in a cosmetic practitioner.

Results

The CIPEES survey collected 1488 responses across 75 countries, with 66% of participants completing all 15 questions. The respondents were 95.6% female and 4.4% male, with ages ranging from 18 to >65 years old (median 33 years old). The number 1 ranked reason for being able to trust a cosmetic injector was qualifications and training, followed by the reputation of the practitioner, and time spent by the practitioner with the survey respondent. Practitioner online presence was considered the least important factor in helping develop trust.

Conclusions

The CIPEES survey results support patient trust being built through credibility, reliability, and intimacy, with low levels of practitioner self-orientation. The trustworthiness equation provides a framework for identifying practitioner weaknesses in patient relationships and actionable methods of improving trustworthiness.

SUBMITTER:

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9687811 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patient experience plays an essential role in improving clinical effectiveness and patient safety. It's important to identify factors influencing patient experience and to improve quality of healthcare. To identify factors that influence patient experience in hospital wards. We conducted a systematic review including six databases; they were PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, ProQuest, and Cochrane. Studies were included if they met the inclusion criteria. The JBI checklist was used to perform quality appraisal. We used 5 domains of the ecological model to organize and synthesize our findings to comprehensively understand the multi-level factors influencing the issue. A total of 138 studies were included, and 164 factors were identified. These factors were integrated into 6 domains. All domains but one (survey-related factors) could be mapped onto the attributes of the ecological framework: intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, community, and public policy level factors. All factors had mixed effect on patient experience. The intrapersonal level refers to individual characteristics of patients. The interpersonal level refers to interactions between patients and healthcare providers, such as the caring time spent by a nurse. The institutional level refers to organizational characteristics, rules and regulations for operations, such as hospital size and accreditation. The community level refers to relationships among organizations, institutions, and informational networks within defined boundaries, such as a hospital located in a larger population area. Public policy level refers to local, state, national, and global laws and policies, including health insurance policies. The sixth domain, survey-related factors, was added to the framework and included factors such as survey response rate and survey response time. The factors influencing patient experience are comprehensive, ranging from intrapersonal to public policy. Providers should adopt a holistic and integrated perspective to assess patient experience and develop context-specific interventions to improve the quality of care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42023401066.

Project description:AimTo synthesize evidence on factors influencing negative outcomes following patient safety incidents.BackgroundPatient safety incidents affect not only patients and families but also healthcare workers (second victims) and institutions (third victims). Nurses are at risk due to stressful environments and direct patient care, leading to defensive practices, job turnover, and errors. Identifying these factors and developing support strategies are crucial.MethodsThis integrative review followed Whittemore and Knafl's method, guided by the middle-range theory of nurses' psychological trauma. Seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, KISS, KMbase, and RISS) were searched for English and Korean articles from 2014 to 2023. Study quality was evaluated using Joanna Briggs Institute tools, and reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist.ResultsA review of 24 cross-sectional studies from the United States and China revealed factors such as genetic/biological (e.g., gender and age), environmental (e.g., work experience and organizational support), and psychological (e.g., distress and coping). Nonpunitive cultures reduced negative emotions, while high harm and preventable incidents increased negative impacts, mitigated by spirituality. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions and supportive policies.ConclusionMultidimensional support strategies are necessary to improve nurses' working environments and patient care quality. Further research should explore additional mitigating factors and third victim studies.Implications for nursing policyThis review highlights the need for global mental health strategies and supportive organizational cultures for nurses. Addressing punitive environments and systemic factors through policy changes can improve nurse well-being and patient care quality. Creating safer environments not only benefits nurses but also enhances the quality and safety of patient care, ultimately driving the provision of better healthcare services.