4.1 Article

Barriers to community healthcare delivery in urban China: a nurse perspective

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17482631.2023.2220524

关键词

Community healthcare; healthcare delivery; community nursing; inductive content analysis; China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines barriers to healthcare delivery from a nurse perspective in the context of Shenzhen, and provides an initial evidence framework to improve community nursing practice at organizational and policy levels.
Purpose There is considerable research on China's community healthcare, but little examining its delivery from a nurse perspective. This article, set in the context of Shenzhen, elicits community nurses' views on barriers to healthcare delivery, providing an initial evidence framework to improve community nursing practice at organizational and policy levels. Methods We used qualitative methods. Data from semi-structured interviews with 42 community nurses in Shenzhen underwent inductive content analysis. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research were consulted to structure our reporting. Results Our analysis suggests four elements discouraging community nurses in care delivery: lack of equipment, stressful work environments, staff incompetence, and patient distrust. Centralized means of procurement, management indifference to nurses' well-being, unsystematic training and reluctance to enter the community healthcare sector, and public prejudices against nursing contributed to these constraints, preventing community nurses from performing patient-centred care, devoting energy to caring, freeing themselves from heavy workloads, and building trust-based care relationships. Conclusions Delivery barriers devalued community health services systematically and undermined nurses' professional advancement and psychological well-being. Targeted management and policy inputs are necessary to reduce caring barriers and enhance the ability of community nursing to safeguard population health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据