急症护理护士和医生之间尊重的系统回顾。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Care Management Review Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1097/HMR.0000000000000370
Derrick P Bransby, Anna T Mayo, Matthew A Cronin, Katie Park, Christina T Yuan
{"title":"急症护理护士和医生之间尊重的系统回顾。","authors":"Derrick P Bransby,&nbsp;Anna T Mayo,&nbsp;Matthew A Cronin,&nbsp;Katie Park,&nbsp;Christina T Yuan","doi":"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interprofessional collaboration between nurses and physicians has become an essential part of patient care, which, when lacking, can lead to well-known challenges. One possible explanation for ineffective nurse-physician collaboration is a lack of respect.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This review aims to enhance our understanding of the role of respect in work between nurses and physicians by synthesizing evidence about the conceptualization of respect, its mechanisms and outcomes, and its origins.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a PRISMA-guided systematic literature review across five databases and reviewed 28 empirical studies about respect between nurses and physicians in acute care settings.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Research about respect between nurses and physicians varied in its conceptualization of respect in terms of its nature (as an attitude or behavior), its target (respect for individuals or groups), and its object (respect for task-relevant capabilities or human rights). The greatest convergence was on respect's object; the majority of studies focused on respect for task-relevant capabilities. The work reviewed offered insights into respect's potential mechanisms (attention and civility), outcomes (e.g., collaboration, patient outcomes, and provider outcomes such as job satisfaction), and origins (e.g., professional status and competence)-the latter suggesting how respect might be generated, developed, and maintained.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Our review highlights a need to appreciate how respect for task-relevant capabilities relates to respect for human rights and what fosters each to avoid rewarding only one while hoping for both, allowing leaders to cultivate more effective nurse-physician collaborations and better patient and provider outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47778,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Management Review","volume":"48 3","pages":"237-248"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of respect between acute care nurses and physicians.\",\"authors\":\"Derrick P Bransby,&nbsp;Anna T Mayo,&nbsp;Matthew A Cronin,&nbsp;Katie Park,&nbsp;Christina T Yuan\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000370\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interprofessional collaboration between nurses and physicians has become an essential part of patient care, which, when lacking, can lead to well-known challenges. One possible explanation for ineffective nurse-physician collaboration is a lack of respect.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This review aims to enhance our understanding of the role of respect in work between nurses and physicians by synthesizing evidence about the conceptualization of respect, its mechanisms and outcomes, and its origins.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a PRISMA-guided systematic literature review across five databases and reviewed 28 empirical studies about respect between nurses and physicians in acute care settings.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Research about respect between nurses and physicians varied in its conceptualization of respect in terms of its nature (as an attitude or behavior), its target (respect for individuals or groups), and its object (respect for task-relevant capabilities or human rights). The greatest convergence was on respect's object; the majority of studies focused on respect for task-relevant capabilities. The work reviewed offered insights into respect's potential mechanisms (attention and civility), outcomes (e.g., collaboration, patient outcomes, and provider outcomes such as job satisfaction), and origins (e.g., professional status and competence)-the latter suggesting how respect might be generated, developed, and maintained.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Our review highlights a need to appreciate how respect for task-relevant capabilities relates to respect for human rights and what fosters each to avoid rewarding only one while hoping for both, allowing leaders to cultivate more effective nurse-physician collaborations and better patient and provider outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"volume\":\"48 3\",\"pages\":\"237-248\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000370\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000370","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:护士和医生之间的跨专业合作已经成为患者护理的重要组成部分,如果缺乏这种合作,可能会导致众所周知的挑战。护士-医生合作无效的一个可能解释是缺乏尊重。目的:本综述旨在通过综合有关尊重的概念、机制和结果以及起源的证据,提高我们对尊重在护士和医生之间工作中的作用的理解。方法:我们对5个数据库进行了prisma引导的系统文献综述,并回顾了28项关于急性护理环境中护士和医生之间尊重的实证研究。结果:关于护士和医生之间尊重的研究在其性质(作为一种态度或行为)、目标(对个人或群体的尊重)和对象(对任务相关能力或人权的尊重)方面对尊重的概念有所不同。最大的共同点是尊重的对象;大多数研究关注的是对任务相关能力的尊重。这些研究为尊重的潜在机制(注意和礼貌)、结果(如合作、患者结果和提供者结果,如工作满意度)和起源(如专业地位和能力)提供了见解,后者建议如何产生、发展和维持尊重。实践启示:我们的回顾强调有必要认识到尊重与任务相关的能力与尊重人权之间的关系,以及如何促进两者的发展,以避免只奖励一方,同时希望两者兼得,从而使领导者能够培养更有效的护士-医生合作,以及更好的患者和提供者结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A systematic review of respect between acute care nurses and physicians.

Background: Interprofessional collaboration between nurses and physicians has become an essential part of patient care, which, when lacking, can lead to well-known challenges. One possible explanation for ineffective nurse-physician collaboration is a lack of respect.

Purpose: This review aims to enhance our understanding of the role of respect in work between nurses and physicians by synthesizing evidence about the conceptualization of respect, its mechanisms and outcomes, and its origins.

Methods: We performed a PRISMA-guided systematic literature review across five databases and reviewed 28 empirical studies about respect between nurses and physicians in acute care settings.

Findings: Research about respect between nurses and physicians varied in its conceptualization of respect in terms of its nature (as an attitude or behavior), its target (respect for individuals or groups), and its object (respect for task-relevant capabilities or human rights). The greatest convergence was on respect's object; the majority of studies focused on respect for task-relevant capabilities. The work reviewed offered insights into respect's potential mechanisms (attention and civility), outcomes (e.g., collaboration, patient outcomes, and provider outcomes such as job satisfaction), and origins (e.g., professional status and competence)-the latter suggesting how respect might be generated, developed, and maintained.

Practice implications: Our review highlights a need to appreciate how respect for task-relevant capabilities relates to respect for human rights and what fosters each to avoid rewarding only one while hoping for both, allowing leaders to cultivate more effective nurse-physician collaborations and better patient and provider outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Care Management Review
Health Care Management Review HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Health Care Management Review (HCMR) disseminates state-of-the-art knowledge about management, leadership, and administration of health care systems, organizations, and agencies. Multidisciplinary and international in scope, articles present completed research relevant to health care management, leadership, and administration, as well report on rigorous evaluations of health care management innovations, or provide a synthesis of prior research that results in evidence-based health care management practice recommendations. Articles are theory-driven and translate findings into implications and recommendations for health care administrators, researchers, and faculty.
期刊最新文献
Improving joy at work and reducing burnout in health care workers in Victoria, Australia using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement joy in work framework: A mixed-methods study. What makes proactive behaviors at work effective? Perspectives of health care executives. Stanford Network for Advancement and Promotion: The impact of a community building-focused leadership development program on the success of underrepresented groups in academic medicine. Exploring barriers to employee voice among certified nursing assistants: A qualitative study. Good therapeutic connections and patient psychological safety: A qualitative survey study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1