Maichou Lor1, Natasha Crooks2, Audrey Tluczek2. 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Nursing, Madison, WI. Electronic address: mlor2@wisc.edu. 2. University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Nursing, Madison, WI.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For decades person-, patient-, family-centered, and culturally competent care models have been evolving and conceptualized in the literature as separate. To our knowledge, there has not been a systematic approach to comparing all four of these conceptual models of care. PURPOSE: To explicate and compare four conceptual care models: person-, patient-, family-centered, and culturally competent care. METHODS: A comparative concept analysis informed by Rogers' evolutionary concept analysis was used to compare 32 nursing research on person-, patient-, family-centered care, and culturally-competent care published between 2009 and 2013. RESULTS: Collective results of analyses of 32 nursing research articles found 12 attributes: collaborative relationship, effective communication, respectful care, holistic perspective, individualized care, inter-professional coordination, self-awareness, empowerment, family as unit of care, interpersonal relationships, cultural knowledge, and cultural skills. Antecedents included: lack of empirical evidence, poor patient outcomes, implementation problems, knowledge deficits, patient/parent emotional distress, poor patient-provider relationships, and health disparities. Consequences included: improved health-related outcomes, increased satisfaction, enhanced patient/family-provider relationships, reduced hospitalization, improved quality of life, improved quality of parent-child relationships, increased trust, enrollment in research, insights about biases, and appreciation for cultural differences. Social justice, advocated by scholars and national organizations, was absent from all studies. CONCLUSIONS: Findings informed the proposed blended conceptual care framework that embraces the attributes of each care model and includes social justice.
BACKGROUND: For decades person-, patient-, family-centered, and culturally competent care models have been evolving and conceptualized in the literature as separate. To our knowledge, there has not been a systematic approach to comparing all four of these conceptual models of care. PURPOSE: To explicate and compare four conceptual care models: person-, patient-, family-centered, and culturally competent care. METHODS: A comparative concept analysis informed by Rogers' evolutionary concept analysis was used to compare 32 nursing research on person-, patient-, family-centered care, and culturally-competent care published between 2009 and 2013. RESULTS: Collective results of analyses of 32 nursing research articles found 12 attributes: collaborative relationship, effective communication, respectful care, holistic perspective, individualized care, inter-professional coordination, self-awareness, empowerment, family as unit of care, interpersonal relationships, cultural knowledge, and cultural skills. Antecedents included: lack of empirical evidence, poor patient outcomes, implementation problems, knowledge deficits, patient/parent emotional distress, poor patient-provider relationships, and health disparities. Consequences included: improved health-related outcomes, increased satisfaction, enhanced patient/family-provider relationships, reduced hospitalization, improved quality of life, improved quality of parent-child relationships, increased trust, enrollment in research, insights about biases, and appreciation for cultural differences. Social justice, advocated by scholars and national organizations, was absent from all studies. CONCLUSIONS: Findings informed the proposed blended conceptual care framework that embraces the attributes of each care model and includes social justice.
Authors: Dawn T Bounds; Dominka A Winiarski; Caitlin H Otwell; Valerie Tobin; Angela C Glover; Adrian Melendez; Niranjan S Karnik Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Nurs Date: 2020-07-20
Authors: Elizabeth Ann Sturgiss; Annette Peart; Lauralie Richard; Lauren Ball; Liesbeth Hunik; Tze Lin Chai; Steven Lau; Danny Vadasz; Grant Russell; Moira Stewart Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-05-02 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Abraham A Brody; Tina Sadarangani; Tessa M Jones; Kimberly Convery; Lisa Groom; Alycia A Bristol; Daniel David Journal: J Gerontol Nurs Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 1.254
Authors: Bram Hengeveld; Jolanda M Maaskant; Robert Lindeboom; Andrea P Marshall; Hester Vermeulen; Anne M Eskes Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2020-12-13 Impact factor: 3.187