Cited by 173Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareNursing Roles and PracticesPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Nurse practitioners' communication styles and their impact on patient outcomes: an integrated literature review

Charlton, Cody R., Dearing, Karen S., Berry, Judith A., Johnson, Mary Jayne·2008·Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to examine the published research from 1999 to 2005 describing nurse practitioner (NP)-patient interactions and to determine the best practice to enhance patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Databases searched included Academic Search Elite, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Health Source Consumer Edition, Health Source Nursing/Academic Edition, Medline, and PsychInfo. CONCLUSIONS: Two communication styles described in the literature and determined by authors were (a) biomedical and (b) biopsychosocial. The biopsychosocial style is identified as patient-centered communication. Seven studies were then analyzed for NPs' communication styles and the impact that they had on patient outcomes. The studies analyzed demonstrated that biopsychosocial (patient-centered) communication style positively influences patient outcomes as evidenced by (a) improved patient satisfaction, (b) increased adherence to treatment plans, and (c) improved patient health. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this review indicate that patient-centered communication incorporated into the NPs' practice is associated with improving patient outcomes such as (a) improved patient satisfaction, (b) increased adherence to treatment plans, and (c) improved patient health. Future research needs to be performed in order to fully study the relationship between NPs using patient-centered communication style and its impact on patient outcomes. Clinical recommendations are made based on findings of the integrated literature review.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2008.00336.x

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Charlton, C. R., Dearing, K. S., Berry, J. A., & Johnson, M. J.
Affiliations
  • State of Utah (US)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
  • Washington State University Spokane (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-07
Volume
20
Issue
7
Pages
382-388
ISSN
  • 1041-2972 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-7599
OpenAlex
W2081228887
Cited by
173
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
10.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
nurse practitioners, nurse-patient communication, communication styles, patient-centered communication, biomedical communication, patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, medication adherence, patient health
MeSH terms
Communication Barriers, Humans, Nurse Practitioners, Nurse-Patient Relations, Patient Satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review