Measuring the quality of patient-provider relationships in serious illness: A scoping review.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Karen Wassef, Kristine Ma, Brigitte N Durieux, Tyler L Brown, Joanna Paladino, Sally Thorne, Justin J Sanders
{"title":"Measuring the quality of patient-provider relationships in serious illness: A scoping review.","authors":"Karen Wassef, Kristine Ma, Brigitte N Durieux, Tyler L Brown, Joanna Paladino, Sally Thorne, Justin J Sanders","doi":"10.1177/02692163251315304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People affected by serious illness face several threats to their well-being: physical symptoms, psychological distress, disrupted social relations, and spiritual/existential crises. Relationships with clinicians provide a form of structured support that promotes shared decision-making and adaptive stress coping. Measuring relationship quality may improve quality assessment and patient care outcomes. However, researchers and those promoting quality improvement lack clear guidance on measuring this.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and assess items from valid measures of patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings for guiding quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Scoping review.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We identified peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1990 to 2023 in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. Eligible articles described the validation of measures assessing healthcare experiences of patient populations characterized by serious illness. We used Clarke et al.'s theory of relationship quality to assess relationship-focused items.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 3868 screened articles, we identified 101 publications describing 47 valid measures used in serious illness settings. Measures assessed patients and other caregivers. We determined that 597 of 2238 items (26.7%) related to relationships. Most measures (<i>n</i> = 46) included items related to engaging the patient as a whole person. Measures evaluated how providers promote information exchange (<i>n</i> = 35), foster therapeutic alliance (<i>n</i> = 35), recognize and respond to emotion (<i>n</i> = 27), and include patients in care-related decisions (<i>n</i> = 23). Few instruments (<i>n</i> = 9) assessed patient self-management and navigation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Measures include items that assess patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings. Researchers may consider these for evaluating and improving relationship quality, a patient-centered care and research outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2692163251315304"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163251315304","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People affected by serious illness face several threats to their well-being: physical symptoms, psychological distress, disrupted social relations, and spiritual/existential crises. Relationships with clinicians provide a form of structured support that promotes shared decision-making and adaptive stress coping. Measuring relationship quality may improve quality assessment and patient care outcomes. However, researchers and those promoting quality improvement lack clear guidance on measuring this.

Aim: To identify and assess items from valid measures of patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings for guiding quality assessment.

Design: Scoping review.

Data sources: We identified peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1990 to 2023 in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. Eligible articles described the validation of measures assessing healthcare experiences of patient populations characterized by serious illness. We used Clarke et al.'s theory of relationship quality to assess relationship-focused items.

Results: From 3868 screened articles, we identified 101 publications describing 47 valid measures used in serious illness settings. Measures assessed patients and other caregivers. We determined that 597 of 2238 items (26.7%) related to relationships. Most measures (n = 46) included items related to engaging the patient as a whole person. Measures evaluated how providers promote information exchange (n = 35), foster therapeutic alliance (n = 35), recognize and respond to emotion (n = 27), and include patients in care-related decisions (n = 23). Few instruments (n = 9) assessed patient self-management and navigation.

Conclusions: Measures include items that assess patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings. Researchers may consider these for evaluating and improving relationship quality, a patient-centered care and research outcome.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Palliative Medicine
Palliative Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信