What were the name and type of measurement method used to measure Caring Practices in the Roch, Dubois, and Clarke (2014) study?
The Caring Nurse-Patient Interaction Short Scale (CNPISS) was the method used to measure Caring Practices. It is a short 5-point scale method, where the results can be rated on a scale from 1 (‘almost never’) to 5 (‘almost always’).
The data collected with the scale were at what level of measurement?
The data collected with the CNPISS is at the interval level of measurement, because the values are located at equal intervals and thus it can be used to determine the degree of difference in scores.
What were the subscales included in the CNPISS used to measure RNs’ perceptions of their Caring Practices? Do these subscales seem relevant?
The subscales included in the CNPISS used to measure RNs’ perceptions of their Caring Practices included clinical care, relational care, and comforting care. These subscales are relevant to the assessment of nurse-patient interactions as they could be used to examine the difference between the mean values for the five scales of CNPISS. Moreover, the results of these subscales could be used to examine the differences in the approaches used by the nurses.
Which subscale for Caring Practices had the lowest mean? What does this result indicate?
Relational care subscale had the lowest mean value of all the subscales, which indicates that nurses perceived clinical and comforting practices as more preferable in their work, comparing to relational care approach.
What were the dispersion results for the Relational Care subscale of the Caring Practices in Table 2? What do these results indicate?
The dispersion results for relational care were 1.00 to 5.00, with SD of 1.01 and mean of 2.90. This shows that the scores were distributed for 1 to 5, however more answers were located within 1.01-point range from 2.90.
Which subscale of Caring Practices has the lowest dispersion or variation of scores?
The lowest dispersion value can be observed in the clinical care subscale, where the results range from 2.44 to 5.0 and the SD is the lowest.
Which subscale of Caring Practices had the highest mean? What do these results indicate?
The highest mean can be observed in the comfort care subscale (4.08). This shows that more nurses performed caring actions using this care approach than the other two options.
How can the Overall rating for Organizational Climate be compared with the Overall rating of Caring Practices?
The overall rating for Organizational Climate was 3.13, whereas Overall rating of Caring Practice was 3.62. The results show that the nurses were overall positive about both the organizational climate and their caring practices, however, more high results were obtained in the rating of caring practice. The vast majority of nurses saw their nursing practices as reliable and efficient.
The response rate for the survey in this study was 45%. Is this a study strength or limitation?
The 45% rate of response means that less than half of the nurses participated in it. This is a major limitation of the study, as the results in the rest of the nurses could have been different. Moreover, the nurses who volunteered could have bias against the hospital and thus it is difficult to make conclusions based on the survey results.
What conclusions did the researchers make regarding the caring practices of the nurses in this study? How might these results affect your practice?
In the discussion of results, the researchers argue that the nurses who participated in the study regularly utilized all the three caring practices in their study. Moreover, they argued that relational care was not used as much as the other types of caring practices. For my practice, this means that the nurses should use relational care more by engaging in conversation with patients and building connections. This can improve both the patients’ perception of care and the nurses’ perception of work.
Reference List
Roch, G., Dubois, C.-A., & Clarke, S. P. (2014). Organizational Climate and Hospital Nurses’ Caring Practices: A Mixed-Methods Study. Research in Nursing & Health, 37(3), 229–240.