Author
Listed:
- Stephanie D Roche
- Alyse M Reichheld
- Nicholas Demosthenes
- Anna C Johansson
- Michael D Howell
- Michael N Cocchi
- Bruce E Landon
- Jennifer P Stevens
Abstract
Rationale: Critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) often require the care of specialist physicians for clinical or procedural expertise. The current state of communication between specialist physicians and families and nurses has not been explored. Objectives: To document the receipt of communication by nurses and family members regarding consultations performed on their patient or loved one, and to quantify how this impacts their overall perceptions of the quality of specialty care. Methods: Prospective survey of 60 adult family members and 90 nurses of 189 ICU patients who received a specialist consultation between March and October of 2015 in a single academic medical center in the United States. Surveys measured the prevalence of direct communication—defined as communication conducted in person, via telephone, or via text-page in which the specialist team gathered information about the patient from the nurse/family member and/or shared recommendations for care—and perceived quality of care. Results: In about two-thirds of family surveys (40/60) and one-half of nurse surveys (75/160), respondents had no direct communication with the specialist team that performed the consultation. Compared to nurses who had no direct communication with the specialists, those who did were 1.5 times more likely to rate the consultation as “excellent” (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.2–1.8, p
Suggested Citation
Stephanie D Roche & Alyse M Reichheld & Nicholas Demosthenes & Anna C Johansson & Michael D Howell & Michael N Cocchi & Bruce E Landon & Jennifer P Stevens, 2019.
"Measuring the quality of inpatient specialist consultation in the intensive care unit: Nursing and family experiences of communication,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, April.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0214918
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214918
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pone00:0214918. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.