Comparative Analysis of Patients’ and Nurses’ Perceptions of Nurse Caring Behaviours in Two Tertiary Hospitals in Jos

ABSTRACT 

The purpose of this study was to comparatively assess patients’ and nurses’ perceptions of nurse caring behaviours in Jos University Teaching hospital (JUTH) and Plateau State Specialist Hospital (PSSH) Jos. A cross-sectional descriptive survey design was employed to study 332 patients and nurses. No sampling was done as all the subjects who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. Data were collected using a modified Caring Behavior Assessment questionnaire (CBA-Q) (37 items), a 5-point likert-type scale and arranged in 7-subscales. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The result indicated that all the caring behaviours statements except item 17 (“Visiting patient if patient moves to another hospital units” with item mean of 2.63; SD = 1.33 and t-value of 1.24 which is below the mean criterion value of 2.50) were accepted as indicators of care by patients. The findings that “using soft gentle voice with patients”, “being kind and considerate to patients”, “answering patients’ questions clearly”, and “giving patients’ treatments and medications on time” were the four highest (most important) scored items by patients. The findings that “visiting patient if patient moves to another hospital unit” “preparing patient for death when it is inevitable”, “Praying with and or for patient” and “checks his or her perception of the patient with the patient before initiating any action” were the four lowest (least important) scored items by patients. The result is indicative that all the caring behaviour statements except item 17 (“visiting patient if patient moves to another hospital unit”, with item mean of 2.62, SD = 0.90, and t-observed value of 1.69 which is below the mean criterion of 2.50) were accepted as indicators of care by nurses. The findings that “giving patients treatments and medications on time”, “treating patients information confidentially”, “using soft gentle voice with patient” and “showing patient love”, were the four highest (most important) scored items by nurses. The findings that “visiting patient if patient moves to another hospital unit, “is calm” and “preparing patient for death when it is inevitable” were the three lowest (least important) scored items by nurses. Comparison of mean scores and standard deviation of patients and nurses on CBAQ subscale showed that patients and nurses perceived humanism/faith hope sensitivity”, “helping/trusting” and “human needs assistant as the most important and “existential phenomenological/spiritual forces” as the least important subscale. The mean scores showed that nurses gave higher mean values than did patients to all the seven subscales. A comparison of the top 10 CBAQ items between patients’ and nurses’ perception revealed similarities as well as differences. Patients and nurses agreed on 6 out of the 10 most important items and do not agree on the remaining 4 top 10 caring behaviour statements. The result also indicated that nurses more than patients value the subscale “humanism faith hope sensitivity” while patients valued the subscale; “human needs assistant” more than nurses. In total, nurses scored higher in 31(83.7%) items than patients who scored higher than nurses in only 5 (13.5%) items. A comparison of the 10 least important CBAQ items showed that patients and nurses agree on 5 out of 10 of the 10 least important items. Items 17 and 23 on the CBAQ (visiting patients when patient moves to another hospital unit”, and “check his or her perception of the patient with the patient before initiating any action” were ranked same by both patients and nurses. There is a significant difference in the perceptions of CBAQ statements as indicators of care between patients and nurses (F=7.456, P < 0.05) P = 007. It was recommended that the result of the study be communicated to nursing staff of the two hospitals. In order to help nurses meet caring expectations of clients and enhance patients’ positive health outcomes. The result from this study therefore provide improvement implications for the care of patients, like concrete information on what behaviours the patient would like to experience.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page . . . . . . . . . i

Approval . . . . . . . . . ii

Certification . . . . . . . . . iii

Dedication . . . . . . . . . iv

Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . v

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . vi

List of Figures. . . . . . . . . viii

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . ix

Abstract . . . . . . . . . xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study . . . . . . . 1

Statement of Problem . . . . . . . . 3

Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . 5

Research Questions . . . . . . . 6

Research Hypothesis . . . . . - . . 6

Significance of the Study . . . . . . . 6

Scope of the Study . . . . . . . . 7

Operational Definitions . . . . . . . 8

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

Conceptual Review . . . . . . . . 10

Review of Theories Underlying the Study . . . . . 31

Empirical Review . . . . . . . . 44

Summary of Reviewed Literature . . . . . . 61

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD

Research Design . . . . . . . 62

Area of Study . . . . . . . . 62

Population of the Study . . . . . . 65

Sample . . . . . . . . 65

Sampling Procedure . . . . . . . 67

Instrument for Data Collection . . . . . 72

Validity of Instrument. . . . . . . 75

Reliability of Instrument . . . . . . 76

Ethical Consideration . . . . . . . 77

Procedure for Data Collection . . . . . 78

Method of Data Analysis . . . . . . 81

CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS

CHAPTER FIVE:DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Implications of Findings . . . . . . 129

Peculiarity and Limitations of the Study . . . . 129

Summary . . . . . . . . 129

Conclusion . . . . . . . . 131

Suggestion for Further Research . . . . . 132

Recommendation . . . . . . . 132

References . . . . . . . . 134

Appendices . . . . . . . . 140