Global Communication Practices and Their Impact on Patient Caregivers’ Satisfaction in the Surgical Waiting Area: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Effective communication between healthcare professionals and patient caregivers is paramount in the surgical waiting area, particularly during periods of heightened stress and emotional vulnerability. Globally, communication practices exhibit considerable variability, from traditional face-to-face interactions to integrating advanced digital technologies. Despite innovations, a comprehensive understanding of the impact of diverse communication strategies on patient caregiver satisfaction remains underdeveloped. This scoping review was designed to systematically map the existing literature on healthcare communication practices and identify strategies that may influence satisfaction among patient caregivers. Methods: A thorough search of multiple databases—Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registries—was conducted. Only studies published in English or those for which an English full text was accessible were included. Eligible studies were those undertaken in hospital settings, including operating theaters, surgical units, surgical waiting areas, postoperative intensive care units, emergency departments, and other clinical areas focusing on patient caregivers. The review adhered to the methodological framework recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute for scoping reviews and was reported following the most recent PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Results: Ultimately, five studies met the inclusion criteria. The selection process involved a structured search utilizing Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), keywords, and index terms, supplemented by manual reference list screening. Initial screening was performed based on titles and abstracts, followed by full-text evaluation using a standardized selection form. Data extraction focused on the communication methods, study designs, and outcomes related to patient caregiver satisfaction. The findings are synthesized narratively and presented through tables and figures, offering a comprehensive overview of global communication practices and their influence on patient caregiver satisfaction in surgical environments. Across the five included studies, digital communication interventions such as SMS, mobile apps, or video updates reported improved patient caregiver satisfaction (e.g., 70.8% in Canada and 97% in Switzerland) and also reduced patient caregiver anxiety (e.g., STAI score ≥ 44) in 74.2% of Ethiopian patient caregivers. Worldwide evidence highlights the practical importance of tailored digital communication practices to support providing timely and accessible information to patient caregivers, while also revealing gaps linked to insurance status, digital literacy, and various communication approaches in healthcare systems. Conclusions: The five studies included showed considerable variation in communication practices across surgical settings. The main findings reveal that structured, timely, and transparent communication, mainly via digital tools such as SMS updates and mobile applications, enhanced patient caregiver satisfaction and alleviated their emotional distress too. Nevertheless, gaps were identified in postoperative communication, and challenges, such as technological accessibility, digital literacy skills of patient caregivers, and inconsistent methods for measuring satisfaction outcomes, were noted across studies. This scoping review identified the different types of healthcare communication practices adopted globally in surgical care settings and also demonstrated their influence on patient caregiver satisfaction. Traditional and digital communication practices both have their significant impact on patient caregiver experiences in surgical healthcare settings, focusing more on timely and consistent real-time updates and culturally sensitive information. Addressing the existing communication gaps and having tailored communication approaches to specific contexts may lead to improved patient caregiver support and surgical outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".