IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v10y2001i3p332-340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nursing Communication: Advocacy for the Patient or Physician?

Author

Listed:
  • Carol A. Williams
  • Monette T. Gossett

Abstract

Communication among nurses, patients, and physicians is a key component of effective health care. In addition to communication with patients, nurses directly or indirectly influence physician-patient communications. This secondary analysis examined registered nurses' interactions with a simulated patient regarding what the physician had told the patient about the reason for hospitalization. Taped interviews (N = 86) were transcribed and content analyzed to classify nurses' approaches to assessment and intervention. The second researcher coded 10% of the transcripts to ensure satisfactory interrater consistency. Major patterns of nursing communication were the following: assessing what the physician had told the patient (85%), encouraging clarification with the physician (62%), encouraging a second opinion, and defending the physician's competence (9%). Findings support literature suggesting that nurses mediate and clarify communications between the patient and the physician. Patient advocacy was also illustrated; however, a small number of nurses advocated most clearly for the physician

Suggested Citation

  • Carol A. Williams & Monette T. Gossett, 2001. "Nursing Communication: Advocacy for the Patient or Physician?," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 10(3), pages 332-340, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:10:y:2001:i:3:p:332-340
    DOI: 10.1177/c10n3r8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/c10n3r8
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/c10n3r8?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:clnure:v:10:y:2001:i:3:p:332-340. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.