Ethics-of-care theories contain important notions regarding the quality of care; however, until now, concrete translations of the insights into instruments are lacking. This may be a result of the completely different type of epistemology, theories and concepts used in the field of quality of care research.
Objectives:
Both the fields of ‘ethics of care’ and ‘quality of care’ aim for improvement of care; therefore; insights could possibly meet by focusing on the following question: How could ethics-of-care theories contribute to better quality in care at a measurement level? This study reviews existing instruments with the aim of bridging this gap and examines the evidence of their psychometric properties, feasibility and responsiveness.
Research design:
A systematic search of the literature was undertaken using multiple electronic databases covering January 1990 through May 2012.
Method and findings:
Of the 3427 unique references identified, 55 studies describing 40 instruments were selected. Using a conceptual framework, an attempt was made to distinguish between related concepts and to group available instruments measuring different types of concepts. A total of 13 instruments that reflect essential aspects of ethics-of-care theory were studied in greater detail, and a quality assessment was conducted.
Conclusion:
Three promising qualitative instruments were found, which follow the logic of the patient and take their specific context into account.
AikenLHSermeusWVan den HeedeK. Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States. BMJ2012; 344: e1717.
2.
Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2001.
3.
HughesRG. Patient safety and quality: an evidence-based handbook for nurses. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare and Quality, 2008.
4.
GandjourAKleinschmitFLittmannV. An evidence-based evaluation of quality and efficiency indicators. Qual Manag Health Care2002; 10(4): 41–52.
5.
MainzJ. Defining and classifying clinical indicators for quality improvement. Int J Qual Health Care2003; 15(6): 523–530.
6.
VarkeyPRellerMKResarRK. Basics of quality improvement in health care. Mayo Clin Proc2007; 82(6): 735–739.
7.
GlenS. Emotional and motivational tendencies: the key to quality nursing care?Nurs Ethics1998; 5(1): 36–42.
8.
BerwickDM. A user’s manual for the IOM’s ‘Quality Chasm’ report. Health Aff2002; 21(3): 80–90.
9.
Van DishoeckAMLingsmaHFMackenbachJP. Random variation and rankability of hospitals using outcome indicators. BMJ Qual Saf2011; 20(10): 869–874.
10.
BergASuhonenRIdvallE. A survey of orthopaedic patients’ assessment of care using the Individualised Care Scale. J Orthop Nurs2007; 11(3–4): 185–193.
11.
GoodrichJCornwellJ. Seeing the person in the patient: the point of care review paper. London: The King’s Fund, 2008.
12.
VosmanFBaartA.Relationship based care and recognition. Part two: good care and recognition. In: LegetCGastmansCVerkerkM (eds) Care, compassion and recognition: an ethical discussion. Leuven: Peeters, 2011, pp. 200–227.
13.
ZandbeltLCSmetsEMAOortFJ. Coding patient-centred behaviour in the medical encounter. Soc Sci Med2005; 61(3): 661–671.
14.
KjeldmandDHolmströmIRosenqvistU. How patient-centred am I? A new method to measure physicians’ patient-centredness. Patient Educ Couns2006; 62(1): 31–37.
15.
ClaytonMFLatimerSDunnTW. Assessing patient-centered communication in a family practice setting: how do we measure it, and whose opinion matters?Patient Educ Couns2011; 84(3): 294–302.
16.
HudonCFortinMHaggertyJL. Measuring patients’ perceptions of patient-centered care: a systematic review of tools for family medicine. Ann Fam Med2011; 9(2): 155–164.
17.
BarnesM. Care in everyday life: an ethic of care in practice. Bristol: Policy Press, 2012.
18.
ElwynGEdwardsAWensingM. Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement. Qual Saf Health Care2003; 12(2): 93–99.
19.
SulmasyDP. The varieties of human dignity: a logical and conceptual analysis. Med Health Care Philos. Epub ahead of print 27 March2012. DOI: 10.1007/s11019-012-9400-1.
20.
TeagueGBCaporinoNE. Patient perceptions of care measures. In: RushAJJrFirstMBBlackerD (eds) Handbook of psychiatric measures. 2nd ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc., 2008, pp. 163–191.
21.
GilliganC. In a different voice: psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.
22.
Van HeistA. Professional loving care: an ethical view of the healthcare sector. Leuven: Peeters, 2011.
23.
PettersenTHemMH. Mature care and reciprocity: two cases from acute psychiatry. Nurs Ethics2011; 18(2): 217–231.
24.
LegetCGastmansCVerkerkM. Care, compassion and recognition: an ethical discussion. Leuven: Peeters, 2011.
25.
TrontoJ. Moral boundaries: a political argument for an ethics of care. New York: Routledge, 1993.
26.
PettersenT. Comprehending care: problems and possibilities in Carol Gilligan’s ethics of care. Doctoral Thesis, University of Oslo, Norway, 2004.
27.
GastmansC. Dignity-enhancing care for persons with dementia and its application to advance euthanasia directives. In: DenierYGastmansCVandeveldeA (eds) Justice, luck and responsibility: philosophical background and ethical implications for end-of-life care. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012, pp. 145–165.
28.
BaartAVosmanF.Relationship based care and recognition. Part one: sketching good care from the theory of presence and five entries. In: LegetCGastmanCVerkerkM (eds) Care, compassion and recognition: an ethical discussion. Leuven: Peeters, 2011, pp. 183–200.
29.
SchuijtK. G-lezing 2005: Zorgzaamheid en zorgvuldigheid [G-reading 2005: Caring and carefulness]. Woerden: NIGZ, 2005.
30.
CossetteSCaraCRicardN. Assessing nurse–patient interactions from a caring perspective: report of the development and preliminary psychometric testing of the Caring Nurse–Patient Interactions Scale. Int J Nurs Stud2005; 42(6): 673–686.
31.
MorseJMSolbergSMNeanderWL. Concepts of caring and caring as a concept. ANS Adv Nurs Sci1990; 13(1): 1–14.
32.
PepinJ. Family caring and caring in nursing. Image J Nurs Sch1992; 24(2): 127–131.
33.
WatsonJ.Nursing: human science and human care: a theory of nursing, issue 15, part 2236. Sudbury, MA (Canada): NLN Publications, 1988, pp. 1–104.
34.
CossetteSCoteJKPepinJ. A dimensional structure of nurse–patient interactions from a caring perspective: refinement of the Caring Nurse–Patient Interaction Scale (CNPI-Short Scale). J Adv Nurs2006; 55(2): 198–214.
35.
BlaisMA. Development of an Inpatient Treatment Alliance Scale. J Nerv Ment Dis2004; 192(7): 487–493.
36.
CapeJ. Patient-rated therapeutic relationship and outcome in general practitioner treatment of psychological problems. Br J Clin Psychol2000; 39: 383–395.
37.
AndersonEHNeafseyPJPeabodyS. Psychometrics of the computer-based Relationships with Health Care Provider Scale in older adults. J Nurs Meas2011; 19(1): 3–16.
38.
KrupatEFrankelRSteinT. The Four Habits Coding Scheme: validation of an instrument to assess clinicians’ communication behavior. Patient Educ Couns2006; 62(1): 38–45.
39.
KimSCBorenDSolemSL. The Kim Alliance Scale: development and preliminary testing. Clin Nurs Res2001; 10(3): 314–331.
40.
YuJKirkM. Evaluation of empathy measurement tools in nursing: systematic review. J Adv Nurs2009; 65(9): 1790–1806.
41.
GreenhalghJLongAFBrettleAJ. Reviewing and selecting outcome measures for use in routine practice. J Eval Clin Pract1998; 4(4): 339–350.
42.
RussellITBlasiZDLambertMF. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: opportunities and threats. In: TempletonAO’BrienP (eds) Evidence-based fertility treatment. London: RCOG Press, 1998, pp. 15–64.
43.
GrangeABekkerHNoyesJ. Adequacy of health-related quality of life measures in children under 5 years old: systematic review. J Adv Nurs2007; 59(3): 197–220.
44.
Del PiccoloLde HaesHHeavenC. Development of the Verona coding definitions of emotional sequences to code health providers’ responses (VR-CoDES-P) to patient cues and concerns. Patient Educ Couns2011; 82(2): 149–155.
45.
EideHEideTRustøenT. Patient validation of cues and concerns identified according to Verona coding definitions of emotional sequences (VR-CoDES): a video- and interview-based approach. Patient Educ Couns2011; 82(2): 156–162.
46.
EllingtonLReblinMClaytonMF. Hospice nurse communication with patients with cancer and their family caregivers. J Palliat Med2012; 15(3): 262–268.
47.
CoxEDSmithMABrownRL. Assessment of the Physician–Caregiver Relationship Scales (PCRS). Patient Educ Couns2008; 70(1): 69–78.
48.
FassaertTvan DulmenSSchellevisF. Active listening in medical consultations: development of the Active Listening Observation Scale (ALOS-global). Patient Educ Couns2007; 68(3): 258–264.
49.
HojatMGonnellaJSNascaTJ. The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy: further psychometric data and differences by gender and specialty at item level. Acad Med2002; 77(10 Suppl.): S58–S60.
50.
HojatMGonnellaJSNascaTJ. Physician empathy: definition, components, measurement, and relationship to gender and specialty. Am J Psychiatry2002; 159(9): 1563–1569.
51.
FieldsSKHojatMGonnellaJS. Comparisons of nurses and physicians on an operational measure of empathy. Eval Health Prof2004; 27(1): 80–94.
52.
Di LilloMCicchettiALo ScalzoA. The Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometrics and group comparisons in Italian physicians. Acad Med2009; 84(9): 1198–1202.
53.
KingSHoloskoMJ. The development and initial validation of the Empathy Scale for Social Workers. Res Soc Work Pract2012; 22(2): 174–185.
54.
ReynoldsWJ. The measurement and development of empathy in nursing. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000.
55.
FarinEGrammLSchmidtE. Taking into account patients’ communication preferences: instrument development and results in chronic back pain patients. Patient Educ Couns2012; 86(1): 41–48.
56.
BovaCFennieKPWatrousE. The Health Care Relationship (HCR) Trust Scale: development and psychometric evaluation. Res Nurs Health2006; 29(5): 477–488.
57.
RadwinLECabralHJ. Trust in Nurses Scale: construct validity and internal reliability evaluation. J Adv Nurs2010; 66(3): 683–689.
58.
KatsukiFGotoMTakagiH. Countertransference to psychiatric patients in a clinical setting: development of the Feeling Checklist–Japanese version. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci2006; 60(6): 727–735.
59.
EnzerIRobinsonJPearsonM. A reliability study of an instrument for measuring general practitioner consultation skills: the LIV-MAAS Scale. Int J Qual Health Care2003; 15(5): 407–412.
60.
ValentineNBBonselGJMurrayCJL. Measuring quality of health care from the user’s perspective in 41 countries: psychometric properties of WHO’s questions on health systems responsiveness. Qual Life Res2007; 16(7): 1107–1125.
61.
OmmenOWirtzMJanssenC. Psychometric evaluation of an instrument to assess patient-reported ‘psychosocial care by physicians’: a structural equation modeling approach. Int J Qual Health Care2009; 21(3): 190–197.
62.
DayCMichelsonDHassanI. Child and adolescent service experience (ChASE): measuring service quality and therapeutic process. Br J Clin Psychol2011; 50(4): 452–464.
63.
AdamsRPriceKTuckerG. The doctor and the patient – how is a clinical encounter perceived?Patient Educ Couns2012; 86(1): 127–133.
64.
AhlenGMattssonBGunnarssonRK. Physician-Patient Questionnaire to assess physician-patient agreement at the consultation. Fam Pract2007; 24(5): 498–503.
65.
SteihaugSMalterudK. Recognition and reciprocity in encounters with women with chronic muscular pain. Scand J Prim Health Care2002; 20(3): 151–156.
66.
SteihaugSMalterudK. Part process analysis: a qualitative method for studying provider-patient interaction. Scand J Public Health2003; 31(2): 107–112.
67.
McGuire-SnieckusRMcCabeRCattyJ. A new scale to assess the therapeutic relationship in community mental health care: STAR. Psychol Med2007; 37(1): 85–95.
68.
MisdrahiDVerdouxHLanconC. The 4-Point ordinal Alliance Self-report: a Self-Report Questionnaire for assessing therapeutic relationships in routine mental health. Compr Psychiatry2009; 50(2): 181–185.
69.
BlaisMAJacoboMCSmithSR. Exploring therapeutic alliance in brief inpatient psychotherapy: a preliminary study. Clin Psychol Psychother2010; 17(5): 386–394.
70.
Van Der Feltz-CornelisCMVan OppenPVan MarwijkHWJ. A Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) in primary care: development and psychometric evaluation. Gen Hosp Psychiatry2004; 26(2): 115–120.
MercerSWMurphyDJ. Validity and reliability of the CARE Measure in secondary care. Clin Gov2008; 13(4): 269–283.
73.
FungCSCHuaATamL. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the CARE Measure in a primary care setting in Hong Kong. Fam Pract2009; 26(5): 398–406.
74.
WirtzMBoeckerMForkmannT. Evaluation of the ‘Consultation and Relational Empathy’ (CARE) measure by means of Rasch-analysis at the example of cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns2011; 82(3): 298–306.
75.
KerstenPWhitePJTennantA. The consultation and relational empathy measure: an investigation of its scaling structure. Disabil Rehabil2012; 34(6): 503–509.
76.
WheelerK.The revised perception of empathy inventory. In: Feher WaltzCDilorioCStricklandOL (eds) Measurement of nursing outcomes: client outcomes and quality of care, vol. 2. New York: Springer, 2003, pp. 207–216.
77.
KaneGCGottoJLMangioneS. Jefferson Scale of Patient’s Perceptions of Physician Empathy: preliminary psychometric data. Croat Med J2007; 48(1): 81–86.
78.
CossetteSPepinJCoteJK. The multidimensionality of caring: a confirmatory factor analysis of the Caring Nurse–Patient Interaction Short Scale. J Adv Nurs2008; 61(6): 699–710.
79.
DuffyJRHoskinsLSeifertRF. Dimensions of caring: psychometric evaluation of the caring assessment tool. ANS Adv Nurs Sci2007; 30(3): 235–245.
80.
EllisJIEllettAJDeWeaverK. Human caring in the social work context: continued development and validation of a complex measure. Res Soc Work Pract2007; 17(1): 66–76.
81.
WuYLarrabeeJHPutmanHP. Caring Behaviors Inventory: a reduction of the 42-item instrument. Nurs Res2006; 55(1): 18–25.
82.
StanfieldMH. Watson's caring theory and instrument development. Doctoral Thesis, Texas Women's University, United States of America, 1991.
83.
HugginsKNGandyWMKohutCD. Emergency department patients’ perception of nurse caring behaviors. Heart Lung1993; 22(4): 356–364.
84.
MariniB.Institutionalized older adults’ perceptions of nurse caring behaviors. A pilot study. J Gerontol Nurs1999; 25(5): 10–16.
85.
ManoginTWBechtelGARamiJS. Caring behaviors by nurses: women’s perceptions during childbirth. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs2000; 29(2): 153–157.
86.
HaidetPO’MalleyKJSharfBF. Characterizing explanatory models of illness in healthcare: development and validation of the CONNECT instrument. Patient Educ Couns2008; 73(2): 232–239.
87.
DewarBMackayRSmithS. Use of emotional touchpoints as a method of tapping into the experience of receiving compassionate care in a hospital setting. J Res Nurs2010; 15(1): 29–41.
88.
BickertonJProcterSJohnsonB. Socio-phenomenology and conversation analysis: interpreting video lifeworld healthcare interactions. Nurs Philos2011; 12(4): 271–281.
89.
DiGioiaA 3rdGreenhousePK. Patient and family shadowing: creating urgency for change. J Nurs Adm2011; 41(1): 23–28.
90.
BatePRobertG. Bringing user experience to healthcare improvement: the concepts, methods and practices of experience based design. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing, 2007.
91.
SchutzA. The phenomenology of the social world. London: Heinemann Educational Publishers, 1967.
92.
MercerSWWattGCMMaxwellM. The development and preliminary validation of the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure: an empathy-based consultation process measure. Fam Pract2004; 21: 699–705.
93.
MercerSW. Practitioner empathy, patient enablement and health outcomes of patients attending the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital: a retrospective and prospective comparison. Wien Med Wochenschr2005; 155(21–22): 498–501.
94.
WeaverMJOwCLWalkerDJ. A questionnaire for patients’ evaluations of their physicians’ humanistic behaviors. J Gen Intern Med1993; 8(3): 135–139.
95.
MatthewsDAFeinsteinAR. A new instrument for patients’ ratings of physician performance in the hospital setting. J Gen Intern Med1989; 4(1): 14–22.
