Person‐Centred Climate Despite Unmet Fundamental Care Needs: Findings From inCHARGE Using a Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods Design

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Aim: To explore person‐centred care in surgical inpatient settings by examining the person‐centred climate alongside patients' experiences of the fulfilment of fundamental care needs. Design: A convergent parallel mixed methods design. Methods: Surgical inpatients ( n = 26) completed the Person‐centred Climate Questionnaire–Patient version and participated in structured interviews, comprising binary questions with open‐ended elaborations. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed separately and thereafter brought together through an integrated interpretation of the findings. Results: Questionnaire scores indicated a person‐centred climate. Interview findings showed that patients described staff as kind, present, and compassionate, while also reporting several unmet fundamental care needs related to information, participation, hygiene, toileting, and symptom management. The integrated findings showed that patients reported a person‐centred climate while simultaneously describing shortcomings in the delivery of fundamental care. Conclusion: These findings highlight that global assessments of person‐centred climate may overlook deficiencies in fundamental care and underscore the importance of considering multiple dimensions when evaluating person‐centred care in clinical practice. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Assessing person‐centred care requires attention to both the care climate and the extent to which patients' fundamental care needs are met. Combining structured measures with opportunities for patients to describe their care experiences may improve the identification of unmet needs and inform efforts to strengthen person‐centred care in practice. Impact: The study illustrates that being treated with kindness and goodwill does not necessarily ensure high‐quality person‐centred care. The findings are relevant for clinicians, nurse leaders, and researchers and support the use of multi‐method approaches when evaluating person‐centred care. Reporting Method: The quantitative and qualitative content in this study is reported in accordance with the relevant STROBE guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution: The project is part of a research program developed in collaboration with the nurses and nursing leaders at the care units. What Does This Paper Contribute to the Wider Global Clinical Community?: The findings highlight the importance of combining different approaches when evaluating person‐centred care. Asking about concrete care situations and experiences may help reveal unmet fundamental care needs that might otherwise remain hidden in survey responses.

This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit: