IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i3p835-d314049.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Nurse-Patient Relationship on Quality of Care and Patient Autonomy in Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Jesús Molina-Mula

    (Nursing and Physiotherapy Department, Universitat de les Illes Balears, 07122 Palma, Spain)

  • Julia Gallo-Estrada

    (Nursing and Physiotherapy Department, Universitat de les Illes Balears, 07122 Palma, Spain)

Abstract

Background: The patient is observed to acquire a passive role and the nurse an expert role with a maternalistic attitude. This relationship among others determines the capacity for autonomy in the decision making of patients. Objectives: The aim of this study is to analyse the nurse-patient relationship and explore their implications for clinical practice, the impact on quality of care, and the decision-making capacity of patients. Design: A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted. Settings and participants: Thirteen in-depth interviews with nurses and 61,484 nursing records from internal medicine and specialties departments in a general hospital from 2015–2016. Methods: A discourse analysis and triangulation for these sources were conducted. Results: The category elaborated from nursing records was defined according to the following codes: Good Patient, Bad patient, and Social Problem. Analysis of the interviews resulted in a category defined as Patient as a passive object. Discussion: A good nurse-patient relationship reduces the days of hospital stay and improves the quality and satisfaction of both. However, in contrast, the good relationship is conditioned by the patient’s submissive role. Conclusion: An equal distribution of power allows decisions about health and disease processes to be acquired by patients, autonomously, with the advice of professionals. The nurse-patient relationship should not pursue the change in values and customs of the patient, but position the professional as a witness of the experience of the health and illness process in the patient and family.

Suggested Citation

  • Jesús Molina-Mula & Julia Gallo-Estrada, 2020. "Impact of Nurse-Patient Relationship on Quality of Care and Patient Autonomy in Decision-Making," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:835-:d:314049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/835/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/835/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Odette Griscti & Megan Aston & Grace Warner & Ruth Martin‐Misener & Deborah McLeod, 2017. "Power and resistance within the hospital's hierarchical system: the experiences of chronically ill patients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1-2), pages 238-247, January.
    2. Wendy L. Nelson & Paul K. J. Han & Angela Fagerlin & Michael Stefanek & Peter A. Ubel, 2007. "Rethinking the Objectives of Decision Aids: A Call for Conceptual Clarity," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 609-618, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marija Kadović & Štefica Mikšić & Robert Lovrić, 2022. "Ability of Emotional Regulation and Control as a Stress Predictor in Healthcare Professionals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:2:p:141-146 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Angela Fagerlin & Karen R. Sepucha & Mick P. Couper & Carrie A. Levin & Eleanor Singer & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, 2010. "Patients’ Knowledge about 9 Common Health Conditions: The DECISIONS Survey," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(5_suppl), pages 35-52, September.
    3. Jerry Selvaseelan, 2018. "Development and Introduction of the Risk-Sentience Auxiliary Framework (RSAF) as an Enabler to the ISO 31000 and ISO 31010 for High-Risk Environments," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Maren Reder & Petra Kolip, 2017. "Does a decision aid improve informed choice in mammography screening? Results from a randomised controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Nurfika Asmaningrum & Dini Kurniawati & Yun‐Fang Tsai, 2020. "Threats to patient dignity in clinical care settings: A qualitative comparison of Indonesian nurses and patients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5-6), pages 899-908, March.
    6. Victoria A. Shaffer & Lukas Hulsey, 2009. "Are patient decision aids effective? Insight from revisiting the debate between correspondence and coherence theories of judgment," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(2), pages 141-146, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:835-:d:314049. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.