IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v28y2019i17-18p3262-3270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improved patient satisfaction 2 years after introducing person‐centred handover in an oncological inpatient care setting

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Kullberg
  • Lena Sharp
  • Hemming Johansson
  • Yvonne Brandberg
  • Mia Bergenmar

Abstract

Aims and objectives To investigate patients’ satisfaction with care, 2 years after the introduction of person‐centred handover (PCH) in an oncological inpatient setting, and to describe patients’ perceptions of individualised care. Background To obtain higher levels of patient satisfaction, bedside nursing handovers have been evaluated with positive results. One such model is PCH, which blends aspects of person‐centred care with the bedside report and provides the opportunity for nursing staff and patients to perform the handover together. Design A survey‐based design was used with one data collection period. Patient satisfaction scores were compared with baseline data from a previous study that has been conducted in the same wards. Method Patient satisfaction was measured with the EORTC IN‐PATSAT32 questionnaire, and individualised care was assessed with the Individualized Care Scale. A total of 120 adult patients with cancer were invited to participate from August 2017–March 2018. Of these, 90 chose to participate. The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used when preparing the paper. Results Compared to the previous study, statistically significant improvements in patient satisfaction were observed in the subscales “Exchange of information between caregivers” and “Nurses’ information provision” postimplementation of PCH. Regarding patients’ perceptions of individualised care, the highest scores were in the ICS‐A subscale “Clinical situation” and ICS‐B “Decisional control,” while “Personal life situation” scored the lowest overall. Conclusions Person‐centred handover seems to have sustainable positive effects on important outcomes regarding patient satisfaction. A novel finding is the positive impact on nurses’ information provision, indicating that PCH can facilitate effective information exchange between patients and nurses. Relevance to clinical practice Person‐centred handover seems to improve patients’ satisfaction with nurses’ provision and exchange of information. Nurses and managers should carefully consider the implementation process of PCH and evaluate its long‐term effects. PCH can be recommended in the oncology inpatient setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Kullberg & Lena Sharp & Hemming Johansson & Yvonne Brandberg & Mia Bergenmar, 2019. "Improved patient satisfaction 2 years after introducing person‐centred handover in an oncological inpatient care setting," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(17-18), pages 3262-3270, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3262-3270
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14903
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.14903?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Renée Gravois & Garvin, Theresa, 2003. "Moving from information transfer to information exchange in health and health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 449-464, February.
    2. Riitta Suhonen & Georgios Efstathiou & Haritini Tsangari & Darja Jarosova & Helena Leino‐Kilpi & Elisabeth Patiraki & Chryssoula Karlou & Zoltan Balogh & Evridiki Papastavrou, 2012. "Patients’ and nurses’ perceptions of individualised care: an international comparative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(7‐8), pages 1155-1167, April.
    3. Maree Johnson & Paula Sanchez & Catherine Zheng, 2016. "The impact of an integrated nursing handover system on nurses' satisfaction and work practices," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1-2), pages 257-268, January.
    4. Kari Sand‐Jecklin & Jay Sherman, 2014. "A quantitative assessment of patient and nurse outcomes of bedside nursing report implementation," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(19-20), pages 2854-2863, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tone M Norekvål & Bengt Fridlund & Philip Moons & Jan E Nordrehaug & Hans I Sævareid & Tore Wentzel‐Larsen & Berit R Hanestad, 2010. "Sense of coherence—a determinant of quality of life over time in older female acute myocardial infarction survivors," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5‐6), pages 820-831, March.
    2. Jerico Franciscus Pardosi & Nick Parr & Salut Muhidin, 2017. "Fathers and infant health and survival in Ende, a rural district of Eastern Indonesia," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 185-207, June.
    3. Hicks, Alison, 2022. "The missing link: Towards an integrated health and information literacy research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    4. Ferlie, Ewan & Crilly, Tessa & Jashapara, Ashok & Peckham, Anna, 2012. "Knowledge mobilisation in healthcare: A critical review of health sector and generic management literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(8), pages 1297-1304.
    5. Bezner Kerr, Rachel & Dakishoni, Laifolo & Shumba, Lizzie & Msachi, Rodgers & Chirwa, Marko, 2008. ""We Grandmothers Know Plenty": Breastfeeding, complementary feeding and the multifaceted role of grandmothers in Malawi," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(5), pages 1095-1105, March.
    6. Niels Buus & Bente Hoeck & Bridget Elizabeth Hamilton, 2017. "Nurses’ shift reports: a systematic literature search and critical review of qualitative field studies," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(19-20), pages 2891-2906, October.
    7. Elise van Belle & Jeltje Giesen & Tiffany Conroy & Marloes van Mierlo & Hester Vermeulen & Getty Huisman‐de Waal & Maud Heinen, 2020. "Exploring person‐centred fundamental nursing care in hospital wards: A multi‐site ethnography," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1933-1944, June.
    8. Reavley, Nicola & Livingston, Jenni & Buchbinder, Rachelle & Bennell, Kim & Stecki, Chris & Osborne, Richard Harry, 2010. "A systematic grounded approach to the development of complex interventions: The Australian WorkHealth Program - Arthritis as a case study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 342-350, February.
    9. Mary F. Forde & Alice Coffey & Josephine Hegarty, 2020. "Bedside handover at the change of nursing shift: A mixed‐methods study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(19-20), pages 3731-3742, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:28:y:2019:i:17-18:p:3262-3270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.