A Nurse Leadership Project to Improve Health Literacy on a Maternal-Infant Unit

Stikes, Reetta; Arterberry, Katheryn B.; Logsdon, M. Cynthia

doi:10.1111/1552-6909.12742

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thirteen of the intervention-related studies included substantial provider-focused education and training components. [30][31][32][36][37][38][42][43][44][45][46][47]57 Across the studies, providers' KABB were assessed using a diverse range of tools, including surveys, interviews, focus groups, and medical record reviews. Intervention study designs included 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), [25][26][27] 7 quasi-experimental designs with comparison groups, [28][29][30][31][32]43,44 and 26 quasi-experimental designs without control groups (including studies with no preintervention data, as well as studies with both preintervention and postintervention data).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intervention study designs included 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), [25][26][27] 7 quasi-experimental designs with comparison groups, [28][29][30][31][32]43,44 and 26 quasi-experimental designs without control groups (including studies with no preintervention data, as well as studies with both preintervention and postintervention data). [33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60] Seventeen studies were conducted outside the context of a specific screening and referral program and instead presented results from surveys more generally exploring providers' attitudes and behaviors about addressing patients' social needs in clinical settings. We refer to these as nonintervention studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Topics such as knowledge about the prevalence of social needs within the served population, impacts of social needs on health, and resources to address social needs were included. 25,27,30,32,35,36,38,[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][55][56][57]59,63,64,[68][69][70][71][72]75 Provider level of knowledge around these topics varied. The most consistent gap in knowledge was about tools and resources needed to address socioeconomic needs once identified.…”

Section: Provider Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Provider Impacts of Socioeconomic Risk Screening and Referral Programs: A Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Initiatives to identify and intervene on patients' socioeconomic needs in the context of health care delivery are expanding. Little information has been compiled across studies on health care providers' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors (KABB) regarding socioeconomic risk screening and referral interventions.Methods: We conducted a systematic scoping review of providers' KABB related to health care-based socioeconomic risk screening and referral interventions using several search engines. Included studies assessed health care providers' KABB about screening and interventions conducted in clinical settings.Results: Of 14,757 studies evaluated, 53 were eligible for inclusion. Study designs were heterogeneous. Outcome measures included attitudes and beliefs (n = 42), provider behaviors (n = 35), and provider knowledge (n = 26). The majority of providers expressed positive attitudes toward addressing patients' socioeconomic risks. Participants endorsed concerns regarding insufficient knowledge and resources, time and workflow disruption, and potential negative impacts of screening and referral programs on relationships. Exposure to screening and referral programs led to increases in providers' positive attitudes, socioeconomic risk screening rates, and reported knowledge about intervention options.Conclusions: Participation in screening and referral programs seems to influence providers' perception of implementation barriers. Future research should explore providers' concerns about addressing identified risks.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Provider Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Provider Impacts of Socioeconomic Risk Screening and Referral Programs: A Scoping Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, the structural variation of tools in terms of items, scales and subscales makes it difficult to aggregate results from across studies that have used the same tool and to compare practice across contexts. This is further hampered by the fact that some studies did not use a tool in its entirety, instead administering individual items (Field, ; Pajnkihar, Stiglic, & Vrbnjak, ; Schroeder et al, ; Stikes, Arterberry, & Logsdon, ) or subscales (Brown, ; Olson, , ), whilst others administered an entire tool, but only reported elements of it (Caris‐Verhallen, Kerkstra, van der Heijden, & Bensing, ; Gilbert, ). The inability to make meaningful comparisons across studies hinders the scientific progression of this body of work and is arguably a further contributing factor to the substantial volume and variability in the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instruments measuring behavioural aspects of the nurse–patient relationship: A scoping review

Feo

Conroy

Wiechula

et al. 2019

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and objectives:To identify and map tools measuring behavioural aspects of the nurse-patient relationship.Background: The behaviours nurses employ to develop relationships with patients form a key part of nursing practice. Systematically measuring these behaviours provides an objective means of assessing and evaluating how nurses establish and maintain relationships with patients in a variety of settings. Whilst tools exist to measure these behaviours, little is known about their aims/scope, structure, method of development and contexts of use. Such knowledge is crucial for understanding the nature of the literature, including in which contexts and for which patient groups existing tools are suited. Design: Scoping review informed by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology.Methods: A database search was undertaken using CINAHL, PsycINFO, Pubmed and Embase. Primary research articles, theses and methodological papers that developed, refined and/or administered tools measuring behavioural aspects of the nursepatient relationship, in any setting and for any patient group, were included. Tools had to measure actual not hypothetical behaviour (e.g., perceptions regarding importance). Data from included studies and tools were mapped. Results are reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Results:One hundred and twenty-seven studies, containing 35 tools, were included. The literature was characterised by substantial variability, stemming from the continued refinement of tools (e.g., reduction to short forms) but also the development of new tools that appeared to duplicate existing work and the inconsistent use of tools across studies. Conclusions:The volume of tools available demonstrates the importance of measuring the nurse-patient relationship. However, the existing duplication and variability create challenges in choosing amongst the tools available and show that, as a concept, the nurse-patient relationship remains poorly understood. Relevance to clinical practice:Research is required to synthesise, and assess the quality of, existing tools, enabling clinicians, leaders/managers, educators and researchers to administer appropriate tools to evaluate the nurse-patient relationship. | 1809 FEO Et al.

show abstract