April 4-6, 2024 • Hyatt Regency • Lexington, KY
Innovations in Health Communication
Innovations in Health Communication
Abstract: Exploring Communication Behaviors: Time-Series Study on Newly Designed Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
Background: Many neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been moving towards single-family room (SFRs) designs because of the positive health outcomes associated for the patient and their families (Fay, Santiago, Real, & Issacs, 2020). Among the healthcare professionals who work in the SFR-designed NICUs, research has demonstrated that individuals perceive decreased teamwork and greater isolation (Fay, Real, & Haynes, 2022). To determine the amount of time individuals spend working in isolation versus communicating with others, we conducted a time-series study. Overall, this study sought to explore how health care professions communicate, work, and engage with technology in a newly designed NICU.
Method: The NICU featured six 12-bed neighborhoods with decentralized nursing stations (DNS) for close patient monitoring during charting. Each neighborhood included a huddle station in the corridor's middle and a door leading to the supply room behind it. Data was collected by four observers and there were 60 unique providers observed for 90 minutes each: 29 nurses, 9 physicians, 10 respiratory therapists, and 12 NCTs resulting in 120 hours of data. The researchers were trained to collect data using Quetech’s WorkStudy+6 software, which was programmed based off previous qualitative observations (Fay, Real, & Haynes, 2022) and activity and communication type categories described in Gurascio-Howard and Malloch (2007).
Results: Across all healthcare providers observed, face-to-face communication occurred for an average of 31.5 out of 90 minutes (SD= 16.9). Communication via technology occurred for an average of 7 minutes (SD= 7.98). The results of a one-way ANOVA demonstrate that there is no statistically significant difference in the amount of face-to-face communication (F(3)= 1.647, p= .189) nor communication via technology (F(3) = 1.157, p = .334) between roles. When it came to the topic of face-to-face communication, a Kruskal-Wallis test provided evidence of a statistically significant difference in coordination (p = .013), informal talk (p = .005), and patient information (p = .024). A series of pairwise comparisons revealed differences between roles in the subdomains of face-to-face communication. In terms of coordination, Doctors (MDs) spent significantly more time than Nurse Care Technicians (NCTs) and Registered Nurses (RNs). Regarding informal talk, MDs exhibited significantly less talk time (3.5 minutes) compared to NCTs (19 minutes) and Respiratory Therapists (RTs) (17.5 minutes). Additionally, there was variation in patient information-related talk, with RTs spending a median of 3 minutes, while MDs spent a median of 9.5 minutes on this type of communication.
Conclusion: The exploratory analysis reveals that face-to-face communication remains the primary mode among healthcare providers, with no significant isolation observed in SFR NICUs featuring decentralized nurse stations. While communication modes were equal across healthcare providers, variations in face-to-face communication topics were identified among different staff roles. This study addresses a research gap in NICU communication by examining spatial-behavioral patterns, communication topics, and time-related factors among different staff roles.
Method: The NICU featured six 12-bed neighborhoods with decentralized nursing stations (DNS) for close patient monitoring during charting. Each neighborhood included a huddle station in the corridor's middle and a door leading to the supply room behind it. Data was collected by four observers and there were 60 unique providers observed for 90 minutes each: 29 nurses, 9 physicians, 10 respiratory therapists, and 12 NCTs resulting in 120 hours of data. The researchers were trained to collect data using Quetech’s WorkStudy+6 software, which was programmed based off previous qualitative observations (Fay, Real, & Haynes, 2022) and activity and communication type categories described in Gurascio-Howard and Malloch (2007).
Results: Across all healthcare providers observed, face-to-face communication occurred for an average of 31.5 out of 90 minutes (SD= 16.9). Communication via technology occurred for an average of 7 minutes (SD= 7.98). The results of a one-way ANOVA demonstrate that there is no statistically significant difference in the amount of face-to-face communication (F(3)= 1.647, p= .189) nor communication via technology (F(3) = 1.157, p = .334) between roles. When it came to the topic of face-to-face communication, a Kruskal-Wallis test provided evidence of a statistically significant difference in coordination (p = .013), informal talk (p = .005), and patient information (p = .024). A series of pairwise comparisons revealed differences between roles in the subdomains of face-to-face communication. In terms of coordination, Doctors (MDs) spent significantly more time than Nurse Care Technicians (NCTs) and Registered Nurses (RNs). Regarding informal talk, MDs exhibited significantly less talk time (3.5 minutes) compared to NCTs (19 minutes) and Respiratory Therapists (RTs) (17.5 minutes). Additionally, there was variation in patient information-related talk, with RTs spending a median of 3 minutes, while MDs spent a median of 9.5 minutes on this type of communication.
Conclusion: The exploratory analysis reveals that face-to-face communication remains the primary mode among healthcare providers, with no significant isolation observed in SFR NICUs featuring decentralized nurse stations. While communication modes were equal across healthcare providers, variations in face-to-face communication topics were identified among different staff roles. This study addresses a research gap in NICU communication by examining spatial-behavioral patterns, communication topics, and time-related factors among different staff roles.