
A recent comment posted on the Health Foundation website in response to Peter Griffith’s piece on measuring the quality of nursing asked: ‘Do we really want to measuring quality in nursing or the overall quality of care provided to the patient? I believe that patient centred care is much more important than focusing solely on the provision of care by nurses.’
This made me start to think about the relationship between nursing and patient, or person, centred care. It seems to me that that there is a false distinction here as there is no single endpoint for healthcare. Person-centred care that produces poor outcomes is of no benefit to the patient, just as a full tank of fuel but no brake pads is not safe for a car driver, so it's important to measure both.
Healthcare is made up of complex interactions – in order to improve person-centred care we need to understand the quality of the component parts. For example, as a car driver I want to be sure that the car starts, travels smoothly and gets me to my destination. If I don’t understand the importance of and monitor the fuel level, the oil and the brake pads, I can’t ensure that they are all in good condition and I can’t be sure I won’t break down. And if I do break down, I won’t know why I’ve broken down or what to do to get going again. If I only measure the fuel, I’ll be stuck if the oil runs out. When looking at the components, fuel is no more important than oil or brake pads; they are equal but different.
Whilst nursing is only one element of healthcare, patients in hospital spend more time with nurses than any other professional group. The reports into care at at Mid Staffordshire Foundation NHS Trust have repeatedly demonstrated that patients and their families see nurses as an essential component of delivering person-centred care.
The nursing profession agrees. Virginia Henderson defined the purpose of nursing in 1960 as ‘to assist the individual, sick or well, in the performance of those activities contributing to health or its recovery (or to peaceful death) that he would perform unaided if he had the necessary strength, will, or knowledge. And to do this in such a way as to help him gain independence as rapidly as possible.’
The problem is that many people don’t know what nurses contribute to either clinical outcomes or to person-centred care. Florence Nightingale wrote in 1859 that the elements of nursing are all but unknown – I would suggest that, nearly 150 years later, they are still unknown to large numbers of people.
Improvement science tells us we cannot improve a thing unless we can measure it to see if a change is an improvement. So yes, I would say it is important for person-centred care (and all other aspects of good, safe healthcare) that we can measure the quality of nursing in addition to other quality measures, just as it is important for car drivers to monitor oil along with fuel levels and brake pads.
Elaine is an Assistant Director at the Health Foundation, www.twitter.com/maxwele2

Florence Nightingale took on a mammoth task in providing a template for Nursing and for hospital design, Both of these models, so carefully developed, we have decided to casually discard in a modern world. We choose to complain that our modern systems are not working!
With person-centered care, all present standards are turned upside down.. The patient comes to the appointment when it suits the patient - or has elective surgery in the near or distant future - as it suits the patient. ( As they do in France).
We still talk the talk, but have not yet learned to walk the walk.
Our British friends, now resident in France,reported an increase in trust in the Medical Profession when they really felt that their opinion and lives mattered. They would not consider moving back to the NHS. In fact, now that they have autonomy, they did not know how they had tolerated the system for so long.
The most important difference to them?
If they phoned the GP surgery in France, it was the GP you spoke to. A doctor who knew you and your history, and how urgently you should be seen. A convenient time was arranged mutually.
NOBODY came between the patient and the Doctor. No receptionist asking what was wrong and telling them when they WOULD be seen..
They found this direct contact invaluable:it saved time and surgery costs, enhanced their experience and generated trust.. Secretaries typed up notes, but they were never visible.
So, I ask: If you tried to introduce that here, what group would stand against it?
And is there an awareness that such a small thing can alter the quality of relationships so dramatically?
Current measures focus mainly on the absence of harm but good nursing is about far more than that and it is high time we recognised and valued it.
It would be excellent to see the Health Foundation investing in this area of work.
A clinical human factors approach helps here because it identifies what those factors invariably are no matter what the setting. For example we know that workload is important. A HF approach shows this can impact at unit level (nurse-patient ratios), job level (degree of difficulty involved), patient level (acuity) and situation level (working environment constraints and enablers).
We know you can’t build the best car in the world by taking the best bits from other designs. System performance derives from how these elements interoperate. Clinical human factors helps us appreciate the system and directs us to look at measures that will provide the best feedback. For example if we know that teamworking is vital for patient safety efforts then we should look at metrics about interdisciplinary training.
Setting a clear goal and linking it to a measurement that can drive progress toward that goal sounds pretty basic. The difficulty is understanding the “system” and co-ordinating the actions that will achieve the goal.
1. What happens when there is disagreement between the professional and the individual as to the best course of action?
2. Who defines the activities that are beneficial to health or its recovery?
3. How does one measure outcomes, when, as you state, there is "no single endpoint for healthcare"?
All good points and I think they serve to illustrate the need for a
wide debate on not only what nurses do but how they do it. Some metrics exist, others need to be developed.
With specific regard to your questions:
1) inherent in the definition is that the nurse assists individuals and therefore the choice is ALWAYS the patient's (unless lacks mental capacity)
2) nurse can offer and patient can decline
3) there are multiple types of outcomes, they are equal but different
I
am happy to continue the conversation if you want to email me elaine.maxwell@health.org.uk