2016
DOI: 10.1080/17538068.2016.1192370
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding team, interpersonal and situational factors is essential for routine communication with patients in the emergency department (ED): A scoping literature review and formation of the ‘T.IP.S’ conceptual framework

Abstract: Introduction Most patient-provider communication skills frameworks focus on interpersonal behaviours within the context of a single consultation. In contrast, Emergency Department (ED) patient encounters consist of many new interactions with different professionals over a short time period. Additionally, ED care often occurs in a chaotic, unpredictable, and overcrowded environment. While these factors are recognised to present a major challenge to effective patient-provider communication in the ED, there is no… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to the existing five analytical themes, a new descriptive theme emerged, describing the role of staff professionalism and teamwork in contributing to the patient experience. This is supported by the previous literature suggesting that patients are direct observers of team-based processes [37,38] and that observation of constructive teamwork is a positive determinant of patient experience in the ED.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…In addition to the existing five analytical themes, a new descriptive theme emerged, describing the role of staff professionalism and teamwork in contributing to the patient experience. This is supported by the previous literature suggesting that patients are direct observers of team-based processes [37,38] and that observation of constructive teamwork is a positive determinant of patient experience in the ED.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…However, systematic analyses of how these two aspects interrelate are scarce (but cf. Graham and Smith, 2016 ; Richmond et al., 2002 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%