Journal of nursing management · 2026
Person-Centered Care, Care Climate, and Quality of Life: Evidence From Inpatient Settings in Kazakhstan.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abdilda Amirshair, Almazan Joseph, Nadirbekova Gulnur, Cruz Jonas Preposi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Person-centered care (PCC) is recognized as a core indicator of high-quality nursing and organizational performance. Although PCC and supportive care climates have been associated with patient outcomes, limited evidence exists from Central Asia on how these factors relate to patients' quality of life (QOL).
AIM: To examine associations between adult inpatients' perceptions of PCC, the care climate, and their QOL in Kazakhstan.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analytical study.
METHODS: A total of 255 adult inpatients from two public hospitals completed the Patient-Centered Inpatient Scale (P-CIS), the Person-Centered Climate Questionnaire-Patient version (PCQ-P), and the WHOQOL-BREF. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations between PCC, care climate, sociodemographic variables, and QOL across physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains.
RESULTS: In the adjusted models, overall PCC experience was associated with psychological, social relationships, and environmental QOL, while overall PCC climate was associated with physical and psychological QOL. Across the four models, R2 values ranged from 0.192 to 0.328, with adjusted R2 values ranging from 0.120 to 0.267. In the bivariate analyses, several individual PCC and care-climate dimensions, including empowerment, safety, and information provision, were associated with specific QOL domains; however, these dimensions were not entered separately into the multivariable models. Participants generally reported positive experiences of respectful and supportive care. PCC-related measures also varied across several sociodemographic characteristics, suggesting differences in reported care experiences across participant groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall PCC experience and PCC climate were associated with selected QOL domains after adjustment, while associations involving individual PCC dimensions were observed only in bivariate analyses and should therefore be interpreted cautiously. Given the exploratory nature of the analyses, the absence of formal adjustment for multiple comparisons, and the modest explanatory power of the adjusted models, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of independent or causal effects. Communication, patient involvement, and culturally responsive care remain important considerations for nursing management. However, patients' QOL is likely shaped by a broader combination of clinical, social, and contextual factors beyond PCC alone.
IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Nurse managers play a critical role in shaping care environments that support empowerment, cultural responsiveness, and effective information exchange. Strengthening communication systems, ensuring linguistic and cultural accessibility, and supporting relational competence among staff may help strengthen PCC and patient-reported care experiences.
AIM: To examine associations between adult inpatients' perceptions of PCC, the care climate, and their QOL in Kazakhstan.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analytical study.
METHODS: A total of 255 adult inpatients from two public hospitals completed the Patient-Centered Inpatient Scale (P-CIS), the Person-Centered Climate Questionnaire-Patient version (PCQ-P), and the WHOQOL-BREF. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations between PCC, care climate, sociodemographic variables, and QOL across physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains.
RESULTS: In the adjusted models, overall PCC experience was associated with psychological, social relationships, and environmental QOL, while overall PCC climate was associated with physical and psychological QOL. Across the four models, R2 values ranged from 0.192 to 0.328, with adjusted R2 values ranging from 0.120 to 0.267. In the bivariate analyses, several individual PCC and care-climate dimensions, including empowerment, safety, and information provision, were associated with specific QOL domains; however, these dimensions were not entered separately into the multivariable models. Participants generally reported positive experiences of respectful and supportive care. PCC-related measures also varied across several sociodemographic characteristics, suggesting differences in reported care experiences across participant groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall PCC experience and PCC climate were associated with selected QOL domains after adjustment, while associations involving individual PCC dimensions were observed only in bivariate analyses and should therefore be interpreted cautiously. Given the exploratory nature of the analyses, the absence of formal adjustment for multiple comparisons, and the modest explanatory power of the adjusted models, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of independent or causal effects. Communication, patient involvement, and culturally responsive care remain important considerations for nursing management. However, patients' QOL is likely shaped by a broader combination of clinical, social, and contextual factors beyond PCC alone.
IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Nurse managers play a critical role in shaping care environments that support empowerment, cultural responsiveness, and effective information exchange. Strengthening communication systems, ensuring linguistic and cultural accessibility, and supporting relational competence among staff may help strengthen PCC and patient-reported care experiences.