Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Medical Home: Family Centered Care.

MCHbest Logo

Strategy. Healthcare Provider Training and Education

Approach. Provide training and education on family centered care to healthcare professionals to increase the collaboration between medical providers and their patients

Return to main MCHbest page >>

Overview. Healthcare providers benefit from training and education on family-centered care.[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] Whether it is something as simple as a shared reading program among medical students,[2] an educational intervention practiced by nurses,[4] or a specific curriculum for primary care providers,[1, 5, 6] when medical professionals are exposed to the tenants of family-centerd care, they have a positive shift in their attitudes and demonstrate progressive changes in their practice.[2, 3, 4, 5] The most common outcome of education on family-centered care is in communication skills development.[1,3, 5] The most impactful educational programs are those that incorporate the family experience directly in the training opportunity.[1, 5]

Evidence. Emerging Evidence. Strategies with this rating typically trend positive and have good potential to work. They often have a growing body of recent, but limited research that documents effects. However, further study is needed to confirm effects, determine which types of health behaviors and conditions these interventions address, and gauge effectiveness across different population groups. (Clarifying Note: The WWFH database calls this "mixed evidence").

Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source. (Read more about understanding evidence ratings).

Source. Peer-Reviewed Literature

Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):

  • Quality of Care. This strategy promotes the degree to which healthcare services meet established standards aimed at achieving optimal health outcomes.
  • Patient Experience of Care. This study improves individuals' perceptions, feelings, and satisfaction with the healthcare services they receive.

Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.

Intervention Type. Collaboration (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).

Intervention Level. Community-Focused

Examples from the Field. There are currently no ESMs that use this strategy. As Title V agencies begin to incorporate this strategy into ESMs, examples will be available here. Until then, you can search for ESMs that have similar intervention components in the ESM database.

Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the Results-Based Accountability framework (for suggestions on how to develop programs to support this strategy, see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort
("What/how much did we do?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Number of providers participating in family-centered care training programs. (Measures workforce engagement in training)
  • Number of educational resources developed on family-centered care practices. (Assesses availability of training materials)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Number of providers demonstrating increased competency in family-centered care after training. (Measures learning outcomes from training)
  • Number of patients reporting more collaborative interactions with trained providers. (Assesses patient-level impact of provider training)

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort
("How well did we do it?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Percent of training programs incorporating active learning and skills practice. (Measures effective educational design)
  • Percent of training content co-designed with patients and families. (Shows authentic partnership in training development)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Percent of providers consistently demonstrating family-centered behaviors in practice. (Measures translation of training into practice)
  • Percent of patients feeling engaged as partners in care by trained providers. (Assesses patient-reported outcomes of family-centered care)

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect
("Is anyone better off?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Number of healthcare systems integrating family-centered care competencies into workforce requirements. (Assesses system-level adoption of training)
  • Number of learning communities formed to share best practices in family-centered care training. (Measures knowledge dissemination efforts)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Number of healthcare organizations showing improved patient outcomes linked to family-centered care practices. (Measures organizational impact of training)
  • Number of policy initiatives elevating family-centered care as a workforce priority. (Shows field-level influence of training)

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect
("How are they better off?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Percent of training initiatives prioritizing needs of diverse patient communities. (Measures equity focus in training design)
  • Percent of training content addressing social determinants of health. (Assesses integration of equity principles in training)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Percent reduction in disparities in patient experiences across diverse groups. (Measures training impact on advancing equity)
  • Percent of patients from various backgrounds reporting culturally affirming interactions with trained providers. (Assesses inclusivity in family-centered care practices)

Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:

  1. Move from measuring quantity to quality.
  2. Move from measuring effort to effect.
  3. Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
  4. The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.

References

[1] Marsh M, Lauden SM, Mahan JD, Schneider L, Saldivar L, Hill N, Diaz C, Abdel-Rasoul M, Reed S. Family-centered communication: A pilot educational intervention using deliberate practice and patient feedback. Patient Educ Couns. 2021 May;104(5):1200-1205. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.09.033. Epub 2020 Sep 28. PMID: 33020005.

[2] Doherty RF, Knab M, Cahn PS. Getting on the same page: an interprofessional common reading program as foundation for patient-centered care. J Interprof Care. 2018 Jul;32(4):444-451. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2018.1433135. Epub 2018 Feb 20. PMID: 29461137.

[3] Hayes D, Edbrooke-Childs J, Martin K, Reid J, Brown R, McCulloch J, Morton L. Increasing person-centred care in paediatrics. Clin Teach. 2020 Aug;17(4):389-394. doi: 10.1111/tct.13100. Epub 2019 Nov 10. PMID: 31710178; PMCID: PMC7497256.

[4] Aita M, Héon M, Savanh P, De Clifford-Faugère G, Charbonneau L. Promoting Family and Siblings' Adaptation Following a Preterm Birth: A Quality Improvement Project of a Family-Centered Care Nursing Educational Intervention. J Pediatr Nurs. 2021 May-Jun;58:21-27. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2020.11.006. Epub 2020 Dec 5. PMID: 33285437.

[5] Gafni-Lachter L, Ben-Sasson A. Promoting Family-Centered Care: A Provider Training Effectiveness Study. Am J Occup Ther. 2022 May 1;76(3):7603205120. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2022.044891. PMID: 35605168.

[6] Toivonen M, Lehtonen L, Löyttyniemi E, Ahlqvist-Björkroth S, Axelin A. Close Collaboration with Parents intervention improves family-centered care in different neonatal unit contexts: a pre-post study. Pediatr Res. 2020 Sep;88(3):421-428. doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0934-2. Epub 2020 May 7. PMID: 32380505; PMCID: PMC7478938.

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.