Best evidence statement (BESt). The effect of communication skills training on nurses' confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families.
General
Guideline Title
Best evidence statement (BESt). The effect of communication skills training on nurses’ confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families.
Bibliographic Source(s)
- Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. Best evidence statement (BESt). The effect of communication skills training on nurses’ confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; 2013 Apr 30. 5 p. [9 references]
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Recommendations
Major Recommendations
The strength of the recommendation (strongly recommended, recommended, or no recommendation) and the quality of the evidence (1a‒5b) are defined at the end of the “Major Recommendations” field.
It is recommended that communication skills training be provided to nurses to improve their confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and their families (van Weert et al, 2011 [2a]; Rask et al., 2009 [2b]; Langewitz et al., 2010 [4a]; Boscart, 2009 [4a]; Wilkinson, Linsell, & Blanchard, 2008 [4b]; McGilton et al., 2006 [4a]; Bowles, Mackintosh, & Torn 2001 [4b]).
Definitions:
Table of Evidence Levels
| Quality Level | Definition |
|---|---|
| 1a† or 1b† | Systematic review, meta-analysis, or meta-synthesis of multiple studies |
| 2a or 2b | Best study design for domain |
| 3a or 3b | Fair study design for domain |
| 4a or 4b | Weak study design for domain |
| 5a or 5b | General review, expert opinion, case report, consensus report, or guideline |
| 5 | Local Consensus |
†a = good quality study; b = lesser quality study
Table of Language and Definitions for Recommendation Strength
| Language for Strength | Definition |
|---|---|
|
It is strongly recommended that… It is strongly recommended that… not… |
When the dimensions for judging the strength of the evidence are applied, there is high support that benefits clearly outweigh risks and burdens (or visa-versa for negative recommendations). |
|
It is recommended that… It is recommended that… not… |
When the dimensions for judging the strength of the evidence are applied, there is moderate support that benefits are closely balanced with risks and burdens. |
|
There is insufficient evidence and a lack of consensus to make a recommendation… |
|
Note : See the original guideline document for the dimensions used for judging the strength of the recommendation.
Clinical Algorithm(s)
None provided
Scope
Disease/Condition(s)
Diseases and conditions in any healthcare setting that require nursing care
Guideline Category
- Counseling
Clinical Specialty
- Nursing
- Oncology
Intended Users
- Advanced Practice Nurses
- Hospitals
- Nurses
- Physicians
Guideline Objective(s)
To evaluate, among direct care nurses, if communication skills training, compared to no communication skills training, affects nurses’ confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families
Target Population
Nurses caring for patients and providing psychosocial support in any healthcare setting
Interventions and Practices Considered
Communication skills training for direct care nurses
Major Outcomes Considered
Nurses’ confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families
Methodology
Methods Used to Collect/Select the Evidence
- Searches of Electronic Databases
Description of Methods Used to Collect/Select the Evidence
Search Strategy
Databases : Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsychINFO, and Cochrane Library
Search Terms : nurses, nursing, psychosocial factors, chronic illness, coping, long-term hospitalization, bone marrow transplant, behavior modification, pediatric oncologic nursing, oncologic nursing, nurse-patient relations, communication skills, communication skills training, psychosocial support, and solution-focused brief therapy
Date Last Search Done : January 13, 2013
Number of Source Documents
Not stated
Methods Used to Assess the Quality and Strength of the Evidence
- Weighting According to a Rating Scheme (Scheme Given)
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Evidence
Table of Evidence Levels
| Quality Level | Definition |
|---|---|
| 1a† or 1b† | Systematic review, meta-analysis, or meta-synthesis of multiple studies |
| 2a or 2b | Best study design for domain |
| 3a or 3b | Fair study design for domain |
| 4a or 4b | Weak study design for domain |
| 5a or 5b | General review, expert opinion, case report, consensus report, or guideline |
| 5 | Local Consensus |
†a = good quality study; b = lesser quality study
Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
- Systematic Review
Description of the Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Not stated
Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
- Expert Consensus
Description of Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Not stated
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Recommendations
Table of Language and Definitions for Recommendation Strength
| Language for Strength | Definition |
|---|---|
| It is strongly recommended that… It is strongly recommended that… not… | When the dimensions for judging the strength of the evidence are applied, there is high support that benefits clearly outweigh risks and burdens (or visa-versa for negative recommendations). |
| It is recommended that… It is recommended that… not… | When the dimensions for judging the strength of the evidence are applied, there is moderate support that benefits are closely balanced with risks and burdens. |
| There is insufficient evidence and a lack of consensus to make a recommendation… |
Note : See the original guideline document for the dimensions used for judging the strength of the recommendation.
Cost Analysis
A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed.
Method of Guideline Validation
- Peer Review
Description of Method of Guideline Validation
This Best Evidence Statement has been reviewed against quality criteria by two independent reviewers from the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center (CCHMC) Evidence Collaboration.
Evidence Supporting the Recommendations
References Supporting the Recommendations
- Boscart VM. A communication intervention for nursing staff in chronic care. J Adv Nurs. 2009 Sep;65(9):1823-32. PubMed
- Bowles N, Mackintosh C, Torn A. Nurses’ communication skills: an evaluation of the impact of solution-focused communication training. J Adv Nurs. 2001 Nov;36(3):347-54. PubMed
- Langewitz W, Heydrich L, Nubling M, Szirt L, Weber H, Grossman P. Swiss Cancer League communication skills training programme for oncology nurses: an evaluation. J Adv Nurs. 2010 Oct;66(10):2266-77. PubMed
- McGilton K, Irwin-Robinson H, Boscart V, Spanjevic L. Communication enhancement: nurse and patient satisfaction outcomes in a complex continuing care facility. J Adv Nurs. 2006 Apr;54(1):35-44. PubMed
- Rask MT, Jensen ML, Andersen J, Zachariae R. Effects of an intervention aimed at improving nurse-patient communication in an oncology outpatient clinic. Cancer Nurs. 2009 Jan-Feb;32(1):E1-11. PubMed
- van Weert JC, Jansen J, Spreeuwenberg PM, van Dulmen S, Bensing JM. Effects of communication skills training and a Question Prompt Sheet to improve communication with older cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011 Oct;80(1):145-59. PubMed
- Wilkinson S, Linsell L, Blanchard K. Communication skills training for nurses working with patients with heart disease. Br J Card Nurs. 2008;3(10):475-81.
Type of Evidence Supporting the Recommendations
The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for each recommendation (see the “Major Recommendations” field).
Benefits/Harms of Implementing the Guideline Recommendations
Potential Benefits
Communication skills training has been shown to be effective at increasing nurses’ ability to provide psychosocial support to patients, confidence in providing psychosocial support, confidence in handling conflicts and criticism, and communication-related self-efficacy.
Potential Harms
Not stated
Qualifying Statements
Qualifying Statements
This Best Evidence Statement addresses only key points of care for the target population; it is not intended to be a comprehensive practice guideline. These recommendations result from review of literature and practices current at the time of their formulation. This Best Evidence Statement does not preclude using care modalities proven efficacious in studies published subsequent to the current revision of this document. This document is not intended to impose standards of care preventing selective variances from the recommendations to meet the specific and unique requirements of individual patients. Adherence to this Statement is voluntary. The clinician in light of the individual circumstances presented by the patient must make the ultimate judgment regarding the priority of any specific procedure.
Implementation of the Guideline
Description of Implementation Strategy
Applicability Issues
Communication skills trainings can be time-consuming. Trainings ranged from 30 minutes to four days in length. Several of the studies also included follow-up training, ranging from four 4 hours to 1.5 days each. It will be important to allot time for nurses to attend communication skills training and follow-up sessions (if needed), outside of their regular assigned work duties. Additionally, extra funding may be needed to support staff time to conduct and participate in the training. Communication skills training sessions could be implemented during orientation for new nursing employees. In addition, the Therapeutic Collaborative training can also be used as a means to achieve communication skills training for nurses. The Therapeutic Collaborative training is currently given to nurses caring for bone marrow transplant patients in a pediatric institution. It aims to assist nurses in forming therapeutic relationships with their patients and families, addressing professional boundaries, the “zone of helpfulness,” and personality style and how it relates to communication. This training has been conducted in a group format over a 4-hour period of time. It is also offered as an internet web-based video, with individual discussion between nurses and their clinical managers. This offers more flexibility for training to be completed and makes it easier from a scheduling standpoint. Communication skills training could be included as a part of the Therapeutic Collaborative training.
Implementation Tools
- Audit Criteria/Indicators
Institute of Medicine (IOM) National Healthcare Quality Report Categories
IOM Care Need
- End of Life Care
- Getting Better
- Living with Illness
IOM Domain
- Effectiveness
- Patient-centeredness
Identifying Information and Availability
Bibliographic Source(s)
- Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. Best evidence statement (BESt). The effect of communication skills training on nurses’ confidence and competence in providing psychosocial support to patients and families. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; 2013 Apr 30. 5 p. [9 references]
Adaptation
Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.
Date Released
2013 Apr 30
Guideline Developer(s)
- Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center - Hospital/Medical Center
Source(s) of Funding
No external funding was received for development of this Best Evidence Statement (BESt).
Guideline Committee
Not stated
Composition of Group That Authored the Guideline
Team Leader/Author : Sharon Penko, MSW, LSW, ACHP-SW, Bone Marrow Transplant Social Worker, Cancer & Blood Diseases Institute
Support/Consultant : Mary Ellen Meier, MSN, RN, CPN, Evidence-Based Practice Mentor-Center for Professional Excellence & Business Integration Research & Evidence-Based Practice
Ad Hoc/Content Reviewer : Maureen Donnelly, MSW, LISW-S, Social Work Clinical Manager, Cancer & Blood Diseases Institute; Laura Flesch, RN, MSN, CRNP, Clinical Director, Bone Marrow Transplantation & Immune Deficiency, Cancer & Blood Diseases Institute
Financial Disclosures/Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of interest were declared for each team member. No financial or intellectual conflicts of interest were found.
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Guideline Availability
Available from the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Web site.
Availability of Companion Documents
The following are available:
- Judging the strength of a recommendation. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; 2008 Jan. 1 p. Available from the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center.
- Grading a body of evidence to answer a clinical question. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; 1 p.
- Table of evidence levels. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; 2008 Feb 29. 1 p. Available from the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center.
In addition, suggested process or outcome measures are available in the original guideline document.
Patient Resources
None available
NGC Status
This NGC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on September 6, 2013.
Copyright Statement
This NGC summary is based on the original full-text guideline, which is subject to the following copyright restrictions:
Copies of this Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center (CCHMC) Best Evidence Statement (BESt) are available online and may be distributed by any organization for the global purpose of improving child health outcomes. Examples of approved uses of the BESt include the following:
- Copies may be provided to anyone involved in the organization’s process for developing and implementing evidence based care;
- Hyperlinks to the CCHMC website may be placed on the organization’s website;
- The BESt may be adopted or adapted for use within the organization, provided that CCHMC receives appropriate attribution on all written or electronic documents; and
- Copies may be provided to patients and the clinicians who manage their care.
Notification of CCHMC at EBDMInfo@cchmc.org for any BESt adopted, adapted, implemented or hyperlinked by the organization is appreciated.
Disclaimer
NGC Disclaimer
The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.
All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public or private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, and similar entities.
Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria.
NGC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC, AHRQ, or its contractor ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.
Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer.