THE MEASUREMENT OF HUMANISTIC AND DEHUMANISTIC BEHAVIORS IN HOSPITAL NURSING ENVIRONMENTS

The purpose of this investigation was to develop a reliable scale to measure the social environment of hospital nursing units according to the degree of humanistic and dehumanistic behaviors as perceived by nursing staff in hospitals. The study was based on a conceptual model proposed by Jan Howard, a sociologist. After reviewing the literature relevant to personalization of care, analyzing interviews with patients in various settings, and studying biological, psychological, and sociological frames of reference, Howard proposed the following necessary conditions for humanized health care. They were the dimensions of Irreplaceability, Holistic Selves, Freedom of Action, Status Equality, Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, Empathy, and Positive Affect.^ It was proposed that a scale composed of behaviors which reflected Howard's dimensions be developed within the framework of the social environment of nursing care units in hospitals. Nursing units were chosen because hospitals are traditionally organized around nursing care units and because patients spend the majority of their time in hospitals interacting with various levels of nursing personnel.^ Approximately 180 behaviors describing both patient and nursing staff behaviors which occur on nursing units were developed. Behaviors which were believed to be humanistic as well as dehumanistic were included. The items were classified under the dimensions of Howard's model by a purposively selected sample of 42 nurses representing a broad range of education, experience, and clinical areas. Those items with a high degree of agreement, at least 50%, were placed in the questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 169 items including six items from the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Short Form).^ The questionnaire, the Social Environment Scale, was distributed to the entire 7 to 3 shift nursing staff (603) of four hospitals including a public county specialty hospital, a public county general and acute hospital, a large university affiliated hospital with all services, and a small general community hospital. Staff were asked to report on a Likert type scale how often the listed behaviors occurred on their units. Three hundred and sixteen respondents (52% of the population) participated in the study.^ An item analysis was done in which each item was examined in relationship to its correlation to its own dimension total and to the totals of the other dimensions. As a result of this analysis, three dimensions, Positive Affect, Irreplaceability, and Freedom of Action were deleted from the scale. The final scale consisted of 70 items with 26 in Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, 25 in Holistic Selves, 12 in Status Equality, and seven in Empathy. The alpha coefficient was over .800 for all scales except Empathy which was .597.^ An analysis of variance by hospital was performed on the means of each dimension of the scale. There was a statistically significant difference between hospitals with a trend for the public hospitals to score lower on the scale than the university or community hospitals. That the scale scores should be lower in crowded, understaffed public hospitals was not unexpected and reflected that the scale had some discriminating ability. These differences were still observed after adjusting for the effect of Social Desirability.^ In summary, there is preliminary evidence based on this exploratory investigation that a reliable scale based on at least four dimensions from Howard's model could be developed to measure the concept of humanistic health care in hospital settings. ^

A COMPARISON OF NEONATAL MORTALITY BETWEEN HOSPITALS WITH LEVEL III NEWBORN INTENSIVE CARE UNITS AND ALL OTHER HOUSTON HOSPITALS

A number of medical and social developments have had an impact on the neonatal mortality over the past ten to 15 years in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine one of these developments, Newborn Intensive Care Units (NICUs), and evaluate their impact on neonatal mortality in Houston, Texas.^ This study was unique in that it used as its data base matched birth and infant death records from two periods of time: 1958-1960 (before NICUs) and 1974-1976 (after NICUs). The neonatal mortality of single, live infants born to Houston resident mothers was compared for two groups: infants born in hospitals which developed NICUs and infants born in all other Houston hospitals. Neonatal mortality comparisons were made using the following birth-characteristic variables: birthweight, gestation, race, sex, maternal age, legitimacy, birth order and prenatal care.^ The results of the study showed that hospitals which developed NICUs had a higher percentage of their population with high risk characteristics. In spite of this, they had lower neonatal mortality rates in two categories: (1) white 3.5-5.5 pounds birthweight infants, (2) low birthweight infants whose mothers received no prenatal care. Black 3.5-5.5 pounds birthweight infants did equally well in either hospital group. While the differences between the two hospital groups for these categories were not statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level, data from the 1958-1960 period substantiate that a marked change occurred in the 3.5-5.5 pounds birthweight category for those infants born in hospitals which developed NICUs. Early data were not available for prenatal care. These findings support the conclusion that, in Houston, NICUs had some impact on neonatal mortality among moderately underweight infants. ^

Implementing and evaluating a Web -based close call reporting system at an urban hospital

Medical errors and close calls are pervasive in health care. It is hypothesized that the causes of close calls are the same as for medical errors; therefore learning about close calls can help prevent errors and increase patient safety. Yet despite efforts to encourage close call reporting, close calls as well as medical errors are under-reported in health care. The purpose of this dissertation was to implement and evaluate a web-based anonymous close call reporting system in three units at an urban hospital. ^ The study participants were physicians, nurses and medical technicians (N = 187) who care for patients in the Medical Intermediate Care Unit, the Surgical Intermediate Care Unit, and the Coronary Catheterization Laboratory in the hospital. We provided educational information to the participants on how to use the system and e-mailed and delivered paper reminders to report to the participants throughout the 19-month project. We surveyed the participants at the beginning and at the end of the study to assess their attitudes and beliefs regarding incident reporting. We found that the majority of the health care providers in our study are supportive of incident reporting in general but in practice very few had actually reported an error or a close call, semi-structured interview 20 weeks after we made the close call reporting system available. The purpose of the interviews was to further assess the participants' attitudes regarding incident reporting and the reporting system. Our findings suggest that the health care providers are supportive of medical error reporting in general, but are not convinced of the benefit of reporting close calls. Barriers to close call reporting cited include lack of time, heavy workloads, preferring to take care of close calls "on the spot", and not seeing the benefits of close call reporting. Consequently only two = close calls were reported via the system by two separate caregivers during the project. ^ The findings suggest that future efforts to increase close call reporting must address barriers to reporting, especially the belief among care givers that it is not worth taking time from their already busy schedules to report close calls. ^