NURS FPX 8008 Assessment 1

NURS FPX 8008 Assessment 1 Analyzing Person-Centered Care with Scientific and Theoretical Evidence Student Name Capella University NURS-FPX8008 Person-Centered Care in Doctoral Practice Professor name Submission Date   Analyzing Person-Centered Care with Scientific and Theoretical Evidence Person-centered care (PCC) is a focus of modern healthcare that encourages treatment of the whole individual, personalized care, and respectful treatment. By focusing on patient autonomy, shared decision-making, and compassionate communication, PCC in nursing is about collaboration, respect, and special caring (Nkhoma et al., 2022). Measurable improvements in patient outcomes and satisfaction can be gained by the scientific study of PCC. In addition to the four quantitative and four qualitative articles included in the paper, there are two nursing theories that relate and link PCC practices to statistical and experiential outcomes. Identified Quantitative and Qualitative Articles for Person-Centered Care Quantitative Research The outcomes help to strengthen understanding of PCC efficacy in healthcare. The quantitative research results demonstrate PCC’s success in enhancing safety, satisfaction, and quality metrics. Yu et al. (2023) explored the relationship between PCC scores and patient outcomes in the inpatient setting. The study design was large cross sectional, in-patient survey. The outcomes assessed were self-reported physical and mental health, perceived need for hospitalization, and measures of care utilization. The authors noted that higher PCC scores were reported as being associated with improved self-reported physical and mental health and indicators of more appropriate service use. Limitations were that it was a cross-sectional design, limited to self-reported associations, and only sampled a single health system. A digital PCC training intervention compared to usual practice with measurement of staff and resident outcomes was performed by McDermid et al. (2022). The study design was a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT). Staff PCC competence, resident care indicators, and satisfaction measures were measured. The authors noted that the digital PCC training improved staff knowledge and skills and led to some resident-reported improvements compared to control clusters. There were a few limitations, such as the short follow-up window in some clusters, the possibility of contamination, and limited generalizability of the setting. Stanhope et al. (2021) assessed if implementing PCCP alters PCC delivery and downstream patient outcomes. A cluster randomized trial in community mental health clinics was used to design the study. Outcome measures included fidelity of PCC practices, engagement with PCC, and service use markers. The authors reported that training led to an increase in observable PCC behaviors and enhanced some factors of patient engagement and self-management, but there were mixed effects on hard clinical endpoints. Limitations included Implementation variability between sites; some outcomes were dependent on provider documentation. Pirhonen et al. (2020) evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PCC from a health care perspective. The study design was an economic evaluation (cost-utility) based on the data from trials of PCC in chronic heart failure. In terms of outcomes, QALYs, healthcare resource use, and cost per QALY were recorded. The authors described that in the study settings, PCC was either the dominant or cost-effective intervention for the targeted populations, compared to usual care. Transferability to other systems is unknown; some categories of costs were estimated based on local tariffs. Qualitative Research The qualitative component of the research investigates patient and staff experiences, focusing on the concepts of empathy, dignity and collaboration. Doherty et al. (2020) examined provider understanding, barriers/facilitators, and experience of a shift from a medical model to a PCC model. The study design was qualitative interviews with practitioners from the community mental-health services who were transitioning to PCC services. Whether providers measured this outcome by their own feedback or by their own observation of the process, therapeutic alliance and patient engagement scores were higher when PCC was meaningfully adopted; common barriers were workflow issues, documentation requirements, and role ambiguity. The limitations were provider-centered (less direct voice of the patient); local context influenced the experience. Lateef and Mhlongo (2022) examined the perception of the nurses about PCC and what they mean by PCC in healthcare environments. This study was designed as a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews/focus groups with the nurses working in the PHC centers. The outcomes that were reported by nurses were holistic, respectful, and tailored communication, which was correlated with patients’ trust, adherence, and better follow-up (i.e., improved engagement and perceived health behavior change). Limitations: Single country/PHC context; findings based on provider perceptions and not measured findings. Boström et al. (2020) described the role of nurses in experiencing PCC in a remote setting, and how this influences patient interactions and outcomes. This study used a qualitative interview study with the RNs who provide PCC over the telephone. The results that registered nurses shared consisted of an increased understanding of patients’ lifeworld’s through structured PCC phone visits, perceived improvements in patients’ self-efficacy and symptom management, and difficulties balancing protocol fidelity with patients’ variation. Limitations were that only a small number of nurses participated and that there was only an emphasis on the nurse’s rather than the patient’s direct experiences. Havana et al. (2023) have compiled and analyzed qualitative evidence of PCCs’ meaning to patients and their perception of outcomes. The study design was a qualitative meta-synthesis of studies exploring hospitalized patients’ experiences of the PCC model. Patients regularly link PCC to dignity, personal attention, more transparent communication, empowerment, and emotional well-being, and they believe that the PCC translates to trust, adherence, and less anxiety. The strength of secondary synthesis is determined by the quality of the primary studies and the context in which they are used. Nursing Theories The quantitative outcome set is based upon Dorothea Orem’s self-care deficit nursing theory. Orem clearly associates nursing interventions with nursing self-transactions with measurable self-care capacities and health outcomes; several quantitative PCC trials assess patient self-efficacy, functional status, readmission, and resource-use constructs that align well with self-care capacities and measurable outcome measures (Hartweg & Metcalfe, 2021). Orem’s framework is useful for designing interventions that have measurable outcomes, such self-care indices, readmissions, and quality of life. The randomized control trails (RCTs), cluster trials, cost-utility analyses, and large surveys measure changes in