Scholarlink

Background <p>Patient–provider communication is fundamental to successful plastic surgery outcomes, yet communication barriers persist across diverse patient populations. This narrative review examines effective communication strategies and shared decision-making practices on patient engagement in plastic surgery. Additionally, it assesses how culturally responsive approaches can improve care quality and optimize surgical outcomes within the specialty.</p> Methods <p>A narrative review of English-language literature (January 2004–November 2025) was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, and reference citation tracking. Utilizing search terms related to plastic surgery, patient communication, and shared decision-making, 150 articles were screened, with 37 ultimately selected for qualitative synthesis.</p> Results <p>Six domains emerged: communication effectiveness, shared decision-making, digital tools, trust-building, cultural responsiveness, and patient outcomes. Empathy and clarity correlated with higher satisfaction (e.g., meta-analysis: reduced decisional conflict). Digital tools improved access but raised privacy risks; cultural sensitivity reduced disparities (e.g., lower reconstruction rates in minorities). Training boosted adherence and safety. Implications for practice include structured shared decision-making tools, culturally tailored education, and ethics-guided digital communication protocols to reduce disparities and optimize outcomes.</p> Conclusions <p>Structured, empathetic, culturally responsive communication improves shared decision-making, trust, equity, and surgical outcomes in plastic surgery. Evidence-based training and tools are essential for patient-centered care in diverse, technology-driven practices.</p> Level of Evidence V <p>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors <a href="http://www.springer.com/00266">www.springer.com/00266</a>.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Patient–Provider Communication in Plastic Surgery: Enhancing Outcomes Through Effective Engagement and Culturally Responsive Care

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月5日

查看全文
  • Abdulla Fakhro,
  • Bisher Tulimat

摘要

Background

Patient–provider communication is fundamental to successful plastic surgery outcomes, yet communication barriers persist across diverse patient populations. This narrative review examines effective communication strategies and shared decision-making practices on patient engagement in plastic surgery. Additionally, it assesses how culturally responsive approaches can improve care quality and optimize surgical outcomes within the specialty.

Methods

A narrative review of English-language literature (January 2004–November 2025) was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, and reference citation tracking. Utilizing search terms related to plastic surgery, patient communication, and shared decision-making, 150 articles were screened, with 37 ultimately selected for qualitative synthesis.

Results

Six domains emerged: communication effectiveness, shared decision-making, digital tools, trust-building, cultural responsiveness, and patient outcomes. Empathy and clarity correlated with higher satisfaction (e.g., meta-analysis: reduced decisional conflict). Digital tools improved access but raised privacy risks; cultural sensitivity reduced disparities (e.g., lower reconstruction rates in minorities). Training boosted adherence and safety. Implications for practice include structured shared decision-making tools, culturally tailored education, and ethics-guided digital communication protocols to reduce disparities and optimize outcomes.

Conclusions

Structured, empathetic, culturally responsive communication improves shared decision-making, trust, equity, and surgical outcomes in plastic surgery. Evidence-based training and tools are essential for patient-centered care in diverse, technology-driven practices.

Level of Evidence V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.