Data on communication patterns in healthcare


Task 3

Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Lecturer’s Name

Task 3
Data Analysis
Data on communication patterns in healthcare organizations for this research project was obtained from qualitative studies from multiple data sources. This was done to reach an appropriate level of internal validity. The secondary data were analyzed in three steps, including the formation of themes, theme matching along communication pattern dimensions, and theme comparison across studies. Qualitative interview transcripts were independently reviewed to come up with preliminary interpretations. This was followed by discussions to refine identified themes and generate new ones. Conceptual labels were given to categorize themes according to a common subject across constructs. Themes were improved at each stage by grouping concepts with the same labels into themes and giving them broader labels. Iterations of this procedure offered a platform for comparing communication patterns among the researched healthcare organizations.
Communication patterns among health care practitioners were analyzed based on the presence or absence of seven characteristics. These characteristics include mindfulness, diversity, rich and lean communication, respectful interaction, trust, heedful interaction, and social and task-relatedness (Steenkamer et al., 2020). Diversity refers to variations in individual worldviews. Mindfulness is the ability to be open to new concepts, methods, and ways of being. Trust is an individual’s willingness to convey their vulnerabilities to another person. Rich and lean communication involve using a potent combination of communication channels to deliver messages (Steenkamer et al., 2020). Social- and task-relatedness are non-work and work-related activities and conversations, respectively. Individuals engaged in heedful interaction focus on the work at hand while being aware of how their activities impact the healthcare team (Steenkamer et al., 2020). Finally, respectful interaction entails open, self-assured, and appreciating communication between people that results in new meaning.
Based on the criteria above, data were coded for each of the seven qualities. Instancesof real-lifeuses from the researchdata had to conform with the interview results pertaining tohow much a given characteristic was present in practice. Additionally, more than halfof the participants in a given studyhad to have provided feedbackconsistent with the interpretations of the characteristics. Between 25% and 50% of respondents required statements that were consistent with the criteria’s descriptions for a characteristic to be labeled as moderate. The examples of real-world applications given in interviews and the observational data required line up in terms of how prevalent the feature was in practice. For a feature to be labeled as bad, less than 25% of respondents must provide responses that meet the standards for the attributes. Examples of real-world applications from interviews and observational data had to match the degree to which a certain feature was present.
By assessing how much each of the seven traits was present or absent collectively, it was possible to determine the general communication patterns in each practice. Data analysis revealed both fragmented and cohesive categories as a result of their conceptual ability to capture the core character of practice participants’ communication patterns. Several of the seven qualities must be met by a practice in order to have coherent communication patterns. At least four of the seven criteria must be low or fairly poor for a practice to be classified as having fragmented intra-practice communication patterns.
Results, Discussion, and Conclusion
According to data analysis, organizations’ communication patterns varied throughout the studies. After a thorough examination of how much each study’s seven characteristics were present, it was discovered that two of the studies’ communication patterns were fragmented. It was also discovered that two of them had coherent communication habits. Of the seven criteria used to examine communication patterns, mindfulness and out as the two elements that were most crucial in separating practices that had attained standardized communication from practices that were the furthest from achieving standardized communication.
Healthcare Organization Characteristics Communication Patterns
1. High diversity
Moderate mindfulness
Low trust
Low respectful interaction
Low rich and lean communication
Moderate heedful interaction
Low social and task relatedness Fragmented
2. Low diversity
Low mindfulness
Moderate trust
Moderate respectful interaction
Moderate rich and lean communication
Moderate heedful interaction
Low social and task relatedness Fragmented
3. High diversity
Moderate mindfulness
High trust
High respectful interaction
High rich and lean communication
High heedful interaction
High social and task relatedness Cohesive
4. High diversity
Moderate mindfulness
High trust
High respectful interaction
Moderate rich and lean communication
Moderate heedful interaction
High social and task relatedness Cohesive

The human aspect of medical procedures is heavily reliant on communication styles. They might be coherent or fragmented, which can be helpful when considering the difficulties of communicating across various medical specialties. Health care workers can be divided based on their communication styles to more effectively handle the unique hurdles that various groups may have (Burrows et al., 2020). It is crucial to note that several communication styles can exist within the same medical institution and that these styles might evolve over time. The last element is especially crucial when formulating plans for modifying and using communication patterns in order to . Group performance often performs better when members of the group have a consistent mental picture of the fundamental goal of the group as opposed to when they do not. Knowing how communication patterns interact might help adopt communication methods in ways that encourage better, more meaningful communication without needlessly impeding the ability to accommodate actual variances between individual doctors and physician practices (Light et al., 2019).
When implementing communication techniques, it may be helpful to understand how communication patterns work in practice. For instance, if communication patterns throughout the practice are consistent, resolving EHR issues with one doctor or nurse may suffice to improve communication. It may be necessary for EHR support employees to work with each patient in situations with more distributed communication patterns to achieve the organization’s communication goals. We may further interpret this data to infer that practices with higher levels of the seven criteria may be more likely to promote communication than practices with lower levels of these characteristics by using the model of practice interactions to decode the term cohesive (Pype et al., 2018).
According to the findings of this study, practices with cohesive communication patterns showed homogenous communication, whereas practices with fragmented communication patterns showed heterogeneous communication. Those practices with the highest communication levels (high communication across all users) exhibited the lowest levels of mindfulness and respect for each other. Conversely, interactions that were most at odds with conventional communication showed a high degree of attentiveness and respect. It may be helpful to understand the communication styles of practice members to achieve more uniform communication in healthcare settings. Additionally, knowing how communication patterns relate to one another could teach important lessons for putting communication techniques into practice.
Dissemination of Findings
The following dissemination plan has been designed using criteria for applying knowledge to practice in order to guarantee that the research’s results guide practice and, as a result, maximize the benefit to patients and healthcare professionals. This has incorporated current evidence from a baseline studylooking at the use of evidence, the Scientist Knowledge Translation Plan (Esmail et al., 2020), and broader research evidence on knowledge translation (Banner et al., 2019; Graham et al., 2018). The best way to disseminate research is through a variety of media, ideally with , according to research evidence. So, in addition to providing study participants with written feedback, dissemination activities will include:
Ten interactive seminars on applying good practice principles will be held statewide.
Using online resources like webpages and social media sites like Twitter.
Webinar and video (YouTube/TED).
Reports on research that are published in full, executive summary, and plain English, as well as in peer-reviewed journals and regional healthcare periodicals.
Therefore, this proactive distribution method gives the depth to perform more in-depth interactive engagement with crucial audiences likehealth organizations and provider staff in order to impact attitudes and behavior change, as well as the breadth to reach out to different audiences.
Critique and Limitations of the Project
The study used a few studies on communication patterns in health care organizations due to the exploratory and in-depth qualitative technique. Because it takes time to conduct interviews, examine work processes, and create variables, the results are less likely to be replicated. Additionally, even if the results of this study may apply to other situations with a comparable setting, they should not be regarded as generalizable. Another drawback of this study is that it concentrated on investigating communication patterns from a viewpoint that presupposed practice participants had equal power to affect the practice regardless of position, function, or title. This study pays less emphasis to traits like authority and leadership structures, which have also been found to be essential, despite the fact that there are advantages to this strategy. Finally, as this is cross-sectional rather than longitudinal research, it is impossible to infer directionality or causation from the data in this dataset.

Banner, D., Bains, M., Carroll, S., Kandola, D. K., Rolfe, D. E., Wong, C., & Graham, I. D. (2019). Patient and public engagement in integrated knowledge translation research: are we there yet?.Research involvement and engagement,5(1), 1-14.
Burrows, K. E., Abelson, J., Miller, P. A., Levine, M., & Vanstone, M. (2020). Understanding health professional role integration in complex adaptive systems: a multiple-case study of physician assistants in Ontario, Canada. BMC Health Services Research, 20(1).
Esmail, R., Hanson, H. M., Holroyd-Leduc, J., Brown, S., Strifler, L., Straus, S. E., … & Clement, F. M. (2020). A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks.Implementation Science,15(1), 1-14.
Graham, I. D., Kothari, A., & McCutcheon, C. (2018). Moving knowledge into action for more effective practice, programmes and policy: protocol for a research programme on integrated knowledge translation.Implementation Science,13(1), 1-15.
Light, J., McNaughton, D., Beukelman, D., Fager, S. K., Fried-Oken, M., Jakobs, T., & Jakobs, E. (2019). Challenges and opportunities in augmentative and alternative communication: Research and technology development to enhance communication and participation for individuals with complex communication needs.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,35(1), 1-12.
Pype, P., Mertens, F., Helewaut, F., & Krystallidou, D. (2018). Healthcare teams as complex adaptive systems: understanding team behaviour through team members perception of interpersonal interaction. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1).
Steenkamer, B., Drewes, H., Putters, K., van Oers, H., & Baan, C. (2020). Reorganizing and integrating public health, health care, social care and wider public services: A theory-based framework for collaborative adaptive health networks to achieve the triple aim.Journal of Health Services Research & Policy,25(3), 187-201.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more
Need assignment help? You can contact our live agent via WhatsApp using +1 718 717 2861

Feel free to ask questions, clarifications, or discounts available when placing an order.
  +1 718 717 2861           + 44 161 818 7126           [email protected]
  +1 718 717 2861         [email protected]