Perceived quality of nursing care and patient education: a cross-sectional study of hospitalised surgical patients in Finland

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aims to analyse the relationship between patient education and the quality of surgical nursing care as perceived by patients. The background of the study lies in the importance of a patient-centred approach for both patient education and quality evaluation.DesignThis was a cross-sectional descriptive correlational study with surgical patients.SettingData were collected in 2013 in one hospital district in Finland.Participants480 hospitalised surgical patients.MethodsThe data were collected using two structured instruments: one measuring the perceived quality of nursing care experienced by patients (Good Nursing Care Scale) and one measuring the received knowledge of hospital patients (RKhp). Data were analysed statistically using descriptive and inferential statistics to describe the sample and study variables. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to analyse the association between the scales.ResultsSurgical hospital patients evaluated the level of the quality of nursing care as high; this was especially true with reference to the environment and staff characteristics, but not to collaboration with family members. Most (85%) of the patients had received sufficient knowledge preoperatively and they were familiar with the proceeding of their care and treatment after discharge; in particular, they had received bio-physiological knowledge, consisting of knowledge of the disease, symptoms and the physiological elements of care. The positive correlation between the perceived quality of surgical nursing care and received knowledge was strong, suggesting a positive relationship between patient education and improvement of the quality of nursing care.ConclusionsBased on the results, the quality of nursing care and patient education are interconnected. Thus, by improving patient education, the quality of nursing care can also be improved. It is particularly important to improve collaboration with family members and patients’ own management strategies as well as the multidimensionality of educational knowledge.

<p>Instruments for Patient Education: Psychometric Evaluation of the Expected Knowledge (EKhp) and the Received Knowledge of Hospital Patients (RKhp)</p>

“…Yes 916 (71) No 329 (26) Mean 68 SD 10) None 547 (42) Secondary vocational education 227 (18) College level vocational education 192 (15) Academic degree 135 (10) Missing 187 (15) Employed 336 (26) Retired 671 (52) Working at home 140 Yes (27) No (73) Mean 53 SD 15) None (58) Secondary vocational education (19) College-level vocational education (13) Academic degree (10) Employed (55) Retired (23) Working at home (housekeeping)…”

“… 0.96 (0.77–0.96) Not reported. M (3.00–3.66) SD (0.40–0.82) 1=fully disagree, 4=fully agree Cano-Plans et al 2018 54 EKhp, RKhp n=263 hip and knee replacement patients, Spain c 30 patients EKhp 0.91 Rkhp 0.86, 0.94 Research team EKhp M 3.23 (2.97–3.50) SD 0.73 (0.68–1.10) At discharge: RKhp M 2.91 (2.54–3.17) SD 0.89 (0.85–1.27) 6–7 months after discharge: RKhp M 3.28 (2.45–3.69) SD 0.66 (0.62–1.05) 1=fully disagree, 4=fully agree Charalambous et al 2018 66 RKho, RKso n=1,603 orthopedic patients, n=615 significant others, Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Lithuania, Spain, Sweden c 30 patients and significant others/country RKhp 0.98 RKso 0.99 Research team in each participating country RKhp M 3.07 (3.36–2.56) SD 0.80 (0.69–1.14) RKso M 2.84 (2.49–3.11) SD 1.03 (1.00–1.22) 1=fully disagree, 4=fully agree Copanitsanou et al 2018 67 EKso, Rkso n=189 significant others of arthroplasty patients (98%), Cyprus, Greece, Spain c 30 significant others/country EKso 0.99 RKso 0.99 Research team in each participating country EKso M 3.65 (3.27–3.94) SD 0.54 (0.23–1.86) RKso M 3.14 (2.63–3.83) SD 0.96 (0.27–1.22) 1=fully disagree, 4=fully agree Copanitsanou et al 2019 68 RKhp, RKso n=180 hip or knee arthroplasty patients (86%), n=72 significant others, Greece c 30 patients and significant others RKhp 0.99 RKso 0.99 Research team RKhp M 2.05 (1.65–2.38) SD 1.06 (0.82–1.33) RKso M 1.71 (1.57–1.81) SD 1.14 (1.03–1.22) Gröndahl et al 2019 55 RKhp …”

“…The instruments were originally developed and piloted in surgical hospital care in collaboration with nurses in clinical practice. 16 , 29 , 55 EKhp is aimed at evaluating the level of expected knowledge on admission to hospital (in wards or outpatient clinics), and RKhp at evaluating the knowledge received by patients, measured at the end or after their hospital stay. 29 , 30 The instruments are completed by patients, significant others, or in some cases, nurses.…”

Missed nursing care in patient education: A qualitative study of different levels of nurses’ perspectives

“…This led to them to be more satisfied with their care and therefore more likely to comply with the instructions, which could minimize their risks of postoperative complications and hospital readmissions (Ferrand et al, 2016; Fredericks, Guruge, Sidani, & Wan, 2010; Goldsmith et al, 2017; Koivisto et al, 2019). However, with the advancements in anaesthesia and surgical techniques and the emphasis on efficiency and productivity at work, more patients are spending less time in the hospitals and are discharged home more quickly than before (Gröndahl, Muurinen, Katajisto, Suhonen, & Leino‐Kilpi, 2019). This limits the interactions between nurses and patients and can result in some patients being provided generic information while others received none (Friberg, Granum, & Bergh, 2012; Winsett, Rottet, Schmitt, Wathen, & Wilson, 2016).…”

Surgical Patients' Perceptions of Nursing Care Quality and Their Satisfactions with Nursing Care

“…Son yıllarda anestezi yöntemleri ve cerrahi tekniklerindeki gelişmeler, yeni teknolojiler, günübirlik cerrahi uygulamaları, hastanın hastanede kalış süresinin kısalığından dolayı evde bakımının desteklenmesi de dâhil olmak üzere pek çok yenilik cerrahi hastasının bakımını etkiler. 11 Hemşirelik bakımından memnuniyet, cerrahi hastasının sağlığını iyileştirmede önemli bir faktördür. 5 Sunulan hizmetten memnun olan hastaların hastalıkla daha iyi başa çıktıkları, tedaviye ve öz bakımlarına uyumlarının daha iyi olduğu belirlenmiştir.…”