Cargando…

The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on how the practices of health care workers may be assessed and measured in relation to compassion. The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) is a promising measure that uses independent observers to assess the quality of social interactions between staff a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bridges, Jackie, Gould, Lisa, Hope, Joanna, Schoonhoven, Lisette, Griffiths, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2019.100001
_version_ 1783558741706145792
author Bridges, Jackie
Gould, Lisa
Hope, Joanna
Schoonhoven, Lisette
Griffiths, Peter
author_facet Bridges, Jackie
Gould, Lisa
Hope, Joanna
Schoonhoven, Lisette
Griffiths, Peter
author_sort Bridges, Jackie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on how the practices of health care workers may be assessed and measured in relation to compassion. The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) is a promising measure that uses independent observers to assess the quality of social interactions between staff and patients in a healthcare context. Further understanding of the relationship between QuIS and constructs such as person-centred care would be helpful to guide its future use in health research. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the validity of QuIS in relation to person-centred care measured using the CARES® Observational Tool (COT™). METHODS: 168 nursing staff-patient care interactions on adult inpatient units in two acute care UK National Health Service hospitals were observed and rated using QuIS and COT™. Analyses explored the relationship between summary and individual item COT™ scores and the likelihood of a negative (lower quality) QuIS rating. RESULTS: As the degree of person-centred care improved, QuIS negative ratings generally decreased and positive social ratings increased. QuIS-rated negative interactions were associated with an absence of some behaviours, in particular staff approaching patients from the front (relative risk (RR) 3.7), introducing themselves (RR 3.1), smiling and making eye contact (RR 3.4), and involving patients in their care (RR 3.7). CONCLUSION: These findings provide further information about the validity of QuIS measurements in healthcare contexts, and the extent to which it can be used to reflect the quality of relational care even for people who are unable to self-report.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7357818
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73578182020-07-17 The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings Bridges, Jackie Gould, Lisa Hope, Joanna Schoonhoven, Lisette Griffiths, Peter Int J Nurs Stud Adv Article BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus on how the practices of health care workers may be assessed and measured in relation to compassion. The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) is a promising measure that uses independent observers to assess the quality of social interactions between staff and patients in a healthcare context. Further understanding of the relationship between QuIS and constructs such as person-centred care would be helpful to guide its future use in health research. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the validity of QuIS in relation to person-centred care measured using the CARES® Observational Tool (COT™). METHODS: 168 nursing staff-patient care interactions on adult inpatient units in two acute care UK National Health Service hospitals were observed and rated using QuIS and COT™. Analyses explored the relationship between summary and individual item COT™ scores and the likelihood of a negative (lower quality) QuIS rating. RESULTS: As the degree of person-centred care improved, QuIS negative ratings generally decreased and positive social ratings increased. QuIS-rated negative interactions were associated with an absence of some behaviours, in particular staff approaching patients from the front (relative risk (RR) 3.7), introducing themselves (RR 3.1), smiling and making eye contact (RR 3.4), and involving patients in their care (RR 3.7). CONCLUSION: These findings provide further information about the validity of QuIS measurements in healthcare contexts, and the extent to which it can be used to reflect the quality of relational care even for people who are unable to self-report. Elsevier Ltd 2019-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7357818/ /pubmed/32685928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2019.100001 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Bridges, Jackie
Gould, Lisa
Hope, Joanna
Schoonhoven, Lisette
Griffiths, Peter
The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title_full The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title_fullStr The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title_full_unstemmed The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title_short The Quality of Interactions Schedule (QuIS) and person-centred care: Concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
title_sort quality of interactions schedule (quis) and person-centred care: concurrent validity in acute hospital settings
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2019.100001
work_keys_str_mv AT bridgesjackie thequalityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT gouldlisa thequalityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT hopejoanna thequalityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT schoonhovenlisette thequalityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT griffithspeter thequalityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT bridgesjackie qualityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT gouldlisa qualityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT hopejoanna qualityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT schoonhovenlisette qualityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings
AT griffithspeter qualityofinteractionsschedulequisandpersoncentredcareconcurrentvalidityinacutehospitalsettings