Cited by 44Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareHealth Education and ValidationPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Instruments measuring behavioural aspects of the nurse–patient relationship: A scoping review

Feo, Rebecca, Conroy, Tiffany, Wiechula, Rick, Rasmussen, Philippa, Kitson, Alison·2020·Journal of Clinical Nursing

Abstract

Aims and objectives: To identify and map tools measuring behavioural aspects of the nurse–patient relationship. Background: The behaviours nurses employ to develop relationships with patients form a key part of nursing practice. Systematically measuring these behaviours provides an objective means of assessing and evaluating how nurses establish and maintain relationships with patients in a variety of settings. Whilst tools exist to measure these behaviours, little is known about their aims/scope, structure, method of development and contexts of use. Such knowledge is crucial for understanding the nature of the literature, including in which contexts and for which patient groups existing tools are suited. Design: Scoping review informed by Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Methods: A database search was undertaken using CINAHL, PsycINFO, Pubmed and Embase. Primary research articles, theses and methodological papers that developed, refined and/or administered tools measuring behavioural aspects of the nurse–patient relationship, in any setting and for any patient group, were included. Tools had to measure actual not hypothetical behaviour (e.g., perceptions regarding importance). Data from included studies and tools were mapped. Results are reported in accordance with PRISMA‐ScR guidelines. Results: One hundred and twenty‐seven studies, containing 35 tools, were included. The literature was characterised by substantial variability, stemming from the continued refinement of tools (e.g., reduction to short forms) but also the development of new tools that appeared to duplicate existing work and the inconsistent use of tools across studies. Conclusions: The volume of tools available demonstrates the importance of measuring the nurse–patient relationship. However, the existing duplication and variability create challenges in choosing amongst the tools available and show that, as a concept, the nurse–patient relationship remains poorly understood. Relevance to clinical practice: Research is required to synthesise, and assess the quality of, existing tools, enabling clinicians, leaders/managers, educators and researchers to administer appropriate tools to evaluate the nurse–patient relationship.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jocn.14947

Cites

46 of 46 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?

  • The PsycInfo database can be useful for questions which combine nursing/midwifery practice with mental health, psychological, and social science concepts.

    “The PsycInfo database can also be useful for questions which combine nursing/midwifery practice with mental health, psychological, and social science concepts, for example, identifying the range of tools to measure behavioural aspects of the nurse–patient relationship (Feo et al., 2020).”
  • Scoping reviews can be used where more conceptual knowledge is required, for example, identifying and mapping existing tools.

    “Another example is where more conceptual knowledge is required, for example, identifying and mapping existing tools [32].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feo, R., Conroy, T., Wiechula, R., Rasmussen, P., & Kitson, A.
Affiliations
  • Flinders University (AU)
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Feo, Rebecca
Venue
Journal of Clinical Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06-25
Volume
29
Issue
11-12
Pages
1808-1821
ISSN
  • 0962-1067 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2702
OpenAlex
W2948709983
Cited by
44
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
nurse-patient relationship, nurse behavior, measurement instruments, tool development, nursing practice evaluation
MeSH terms
Humans, Nurse-Patient Relations, Nurses, Nursing Care

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