{"title":"Watson's Caring Science-Based Interventions in Holistic Nursing and Health Care: A Scoping Review of Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes.","authors":"Alice Yan, Christi Zuber","doi":"10.1177/08980101261475483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>PurposeTo map and summarize the literature on Watson's Caring Science Theory-based interventions in relation to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. Watson's Caring Science Theory provides a foundational framework for relational and holistic nursing care, yet evidence on patient-centered outcomes remains fragmented.DesignScoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological framework and reported per PRISMA-ScR.MethodsTwo primary databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched, supplemented by Google Scholar, for English-language, peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025. Data were charted to summarize study characteristics, intervention components, theoretical operationalization, and outcome domains.FindingsTwenty-four studies met inclusion criteria, including 17 randomized controlled trials. Studies were conducted in diverse contexts, including oncology, maternity care, chronic illness management, surgical recovery, palliative care, and caregiver support. Intervention content and duration varied, but commonly emphasized relational care, emotional presence, individualized education, and supportive environments. Interventions improved patient satisfaction, psychological outcomes, symptom management, quality of life, self-care behaviors, and caregiver well-being.ConclusionsWatson's Caring Science Theory offers a meaningful framework for holistic nursing and health care. The evidence suggests positive patient-centered and psychosocial outcomes but remains heterogeneous. Future research should strengthen theory reporting, prioritize patient-centered outcomes, and use longer follow-up and multisite designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51615,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Holistic Nursing","volume":" ","pages":"8980101261475483"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Holistic Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08980101261475483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PurposeTo map and summarize the literature on Watson's Caring Science Theory-based interventions in relation to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes. Watson's Caring Science Theory provides a foundational framework for relational and holistic nursing care, yet evidence on patient-centered outcomes remains fragmented.DesignScoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage methodological framework and reported per PRISMA-ScR.MethodsTwo primary databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched, supplemented by Google Scholar, for English-language, peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025. Data were charted to summarize study characteristics, intervention components, theoretical operationalization, and outcome domains.FindingsTwenty-four studies met inclusion criteria, including 17 randomized controlled trials. Studies were conducted in diverse contexts, including oncology, maternity care, chronic illness management, surgical recovery, palliative care, and caregiver support. Intervention content and duration varied, but commonly emphasized relational care, emotional presence, individualized education, and supportive environments. Interventions improved patient satisfaction, psychological outcomes, symptom management, quality of life, self-care behaviors, and caregiver well-being.ConclusionsWatson's Caring Science Theory offers a meaningful framework for holistic nursing and health care. The evidence suggests positive patient-centered and psychosocial outcomes but remains heterogeneous. Future research should strengthen theory reporting, prioritize patient-centered outcomes, and use longer follow-up and multisite designs.
期刊介绍:
Manuscripts are solicited that deal with the processes of knowledge development and application including research, concept analysis and theory development, practical applications of research and theory, clinical case studies and analysis, practice applications in general, educational approaches and evaluation, and aesthetic expressions of holistic knowledge. While the journal seeks to support work grounded in evidence, the editorial philosophy suggests that there are many diverse sources of “evidence” beyond the realm of what is called “empirical” and that many methods are appropriate for discovering evidence and generating knowledge.