It is complicated! – misunderstanding the complexities of ‘complex’

Terminology matters ‐ as Lakoff emphasised, words and phrases evoke powerful images and frames of understanding. It is for that reason that we need to discern and use appropriately the term complex/complexity in the health science/professional/policy domain. Complex is the fashionable term used when in reality one means ‘complicated’, ‘difficult to understand’ or ‘multiple simultaneous actions’. However, this is not what complex means. The Latin term means ‘entwined/interwoven’ ‐ a structural characteristic describing systems. Complexity arises from the interactions between structurally connected entities ‐ a functional characteristic of a system. The basis of scientific rigor is a clear understanding of a discipline's epistemology. Complexity refers to the emergence of outcomes from the interactions of a system's constituent components (and thus has nothing in common with the colloquial meaning of complicatedness).     

Beyond ‘person‐centred’ care: a new vision for gerontological nursing

Currently considerable emphasis is placed on the promotion of person‐centred care, which has become a watchword for good practice. This paper takes a constructively critical look at some of the assumptions underpinning person‐centredness, and suggests that a relationship‐centred approach to care might be more appropriate. A framework describing the potential dimensions of relationship‐centred care is provided, and implications for further development are considered.     

Observations of nursing staff compliance to a checklist for person‐centred handovers – a quality improvement project

Nursing shift‐to‐shift handovers are important as they impact the care quality indicators such as safety, patient satisfaction and continuity. However, nurses’ handovers have also been criticised and described as unstructured and ineffective. To improve the handovers and involve patients and their loved ones in the process, a person‐centred handover (PCH) model performed at bedside has been developed and tested at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. This study reports on the nursing staffs’ compliance to a checklist used for the newly introduced PCH model. A total of 43 PCH sessions were observed at two acute care wards, using a structured observation protocol. None of the observed handover sessions included all the 13 PCH checklist subcomponents. The checklist was used in 18 (44%) of the observed handover sessions. A statistically significant higher number of subcomponents were observed when the nurses used the PCH checklist (6.4 vs. 4.5 subcomponents, p < 0.05). The mean time spent on each PCH was 6 minutes. In 56% of the sessions, the patients were observed to actively participate in the handover. Overall, the nursing staffs’ compliance to the PCH checklist needs to be improved. The observations suggest that training on communication‐oriented tasks would be beneficial to establish a person‐centred handover process.     

Seeing the person behind the patient: enhancing the care of older people using a biographical approach

Recent policy statements have stressed the need for fundamental changes to the NHS, especially to the hospital care of older people. Person-centred care underpins such changes. If practitioners are to deliver person-centred care, then they need to learn more about the patient as an individual. One way that this might be achieved is through biographical approaches. This paper describes the findings of a developmental study undertaken over a 6-month period to investigate the introduction of a biographical approach to care on a unit in a NHS hospital. It concentrates on the views of the practitioners who used the approach. The study aimed to explore whether a biographical approach - in the form of storytelling - might be used to encourage person-centred practice. Using a practice development approach, the study explored the views of older people, their family carers and practitioners regarding their participation in life story work. Initial data were collected by focus groups with staff from a nursing home who regularly used life stories as a basis for care planning. Further data were collected through focus groups, semistructured interviews and observation - undertaken before and after the introduction of life story work - with older people, family carers and practitioners. Findings revealed that life stories helped practitioners to see patients as people, to understand individuals more fully and to form closer relationships with their families. Support workers also said how much they enjoyed using the approach to inform their care. Further longitudinal research is required to investigate biographical approaches more fully and to work more closely with practitioners to explore how biographical approaches can be undertaken as part of standard practice and be integrated into the culture and management of care.     

Mental health nurses’ experience of physical health care and health promotion initiatives for people with severe mental illness

Health care for people with severe mental illness is often divided into physical health care and mental health care despite the importance of a holistic approach to caring for the whole person. Mental health nurses have an important role not only in preventing ill health, but also in promoting health, to improve the overall health among people with severe mental illness and to develop a more person‐centred, integrated physical and mental health care. Thus, the aim of this study was to describe mental health nurses’ experiences of facilitating aspects that promote physical health and support a healthy lifestyle for people with severe mental illness. Interviews were conducted with mental health nurses (n = 15), and a qualitative content analysis was used to capture the nurse’s experiences. Analysis of the interviews generated three categories: (i) to have a health promotion focus in every encounter, (ii) to support with each person’s unique prerequisites in mind and (iii) to take responsibility for health promotion in every level of the organization. The results show the importance of a health promotion focus that permeates the entire organization of mental health care. Shared responsibility for health and health promotion activities should exist at all levels: in the person‐centred care in the relation with the patient, embedded in a joint vision within the working unit, and in decisions at management level.