z-logo
Premium
Promoting patient engagement: a scoping review of actions that align with the interactive care model
Author(s) -
Tobiano Georgia,
JerofkeOwen Teresa,
Marshall Andrea P.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of caring sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.678
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1471-6712
pISSN - 0283-9318
DOI - 10.1111/scs.12914
Subject(s) - cinahl , clarity , psycinfo , medline , context (archaeology) , health care , nursing , medicine , citation , psychology , medical education , psychological intervention , computer science , paleontology , biochemistry , chemistry , political science , law , economics , biology , economic growth , world wide web
Background Conceptual clarity for the term patient engagement is growing. However, there is variability in patient engagement in healthcare, which could be due to the absence of models to guide practice or a myriad of organisational, nurse and patient factors. The recently developed ‘Interactive Care Model’ provides guidance on how to genuinely promote individualised patient engagement. An understanding of how to action this model in nursing is required. Aims The aim of this scoping review was to examine actions in the published scientific literature that align with the Interactive Care Model, in the context of nursing care of hospitalised patients. Data sources In 2018, searches of CINAHL, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and PsycInfo were undertaken, for literature published between 2008 and 2018. This was followed by citation tracking. Review methods Two researchers screened and selected studies using prespecified criteria. Data were charted into a pre‐established tool and collated and summarised using numerical summaries and deductive content analysis. For content analysis, categories were generated from the ‘Interactive Care Model’. Findings Forty‐three studies were included in the review, 33 noninterventional and 10 interventional studies. Publications on the topic are increasing in number over time, with most conducted in Europe with patient or nurse participants. Forty‐two actions were found in the literature that aligned with the ‘Interactive Care Model’. The actions uncovered differed between intervention and noninterventional studies; in interventional studies actions were formalised. Conclusions This review provides an overview of actions that promote patient engagement and could inform implementation of the Interactive Care Model and the design and testing of patient engagement interventions to support the model. There are opportunities to explore latter phases of the Interactive Care Model to foster patient engagement in self‐management and to motivate patients’ management of healthcare beyond hospitalisation. Further, there is a need to rigorously evaluate patient engagement interventions.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here