Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42093074›Full record

ArticleJournal of nursing management2026

Exploring Mutuality in Nurse-Care Recipient Relationships in a Primary Care Setting: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.

Erica Busca, Isabella Santomauro, Silvia Caristia, Angela Durante, Federica Manservisi, Simona Milani, Ines Basso, Erika Bassi, Alberto Dal Molin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nursing management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Erica BuscaDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, Novara, 28100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1960-2912
Isabella SantomauroDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, Novara, 28100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1003-1239
Silvia CaristiaDepartment for Sustainable Research and Ecological Transition, University of Piemonte Orientale, P.za Sant'Eusebio 5, Vercelli, 13100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0660-1547
Angela DuranteTuscany Foundation "G. Monasterio,", Via Giuseppe Moruzzi 1, Pisa, 56124, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1034-5988
Federica ManservisiLocal Health Authority of Biella, Via Dei Ponderanesi 2, Ponderano, 13875, Italy.
Simona MilaniLocal Health Authority of Biella, Via Dei Ponderanesi 2, Ponderano, 13875, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2005-2648
Ines BassoDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, Novara, 28100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9283-236X
Erika BassiDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, Novara, 28100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6031-1271
Alberto Dal MolinDepartment of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Via Solaroli 17, Novara, 28100, Italy, unipmn.it.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2263-1340

Funding

CRUI-CARENextGenerationEU PE_00000015Universita degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn primary care (PC), nurses ensure continuity and person-centered care, fostering long-term relationships with patients and caregivers. How mutuality, a relational process closely linked to patient-centered communication, develops in this context remains underexplored.

aimsTo describe the characteristics of mutuality and explore how it develops in the relationships between nurses and care recipients in a PC setting.

methodA qualitative descriptive study was conducted in a PC setting. Participants included 14 nurses trained in Family and Community Nursing and 27 care recipients (patients and family caregivers). Data were collected between May and July 2024 through semistructured interviews. A total of 28 interviews were conducted, including both individual and dyadic interviews with patients and caregivers. Data were analyzed using framework analysis, guided by a conceptual framework on mutuality in the nurse-patient relationship. The framework focused on influencing factors, the mutuality process, and outcomes.

resultsFindings from 28 interviews revealed that mutuality was influenced by both organizational and personal factors. Nursing care delivery models that ensured continuity of care and nurse autonomy supported trust, stable, and long-term relationships. The process of mutuality unfolded progressively through three dimensions: (1) building and going beyond the formal encounter, (2) being a consistent point of reference, and (3) deciding and sharing care. Mutuality emerged as a co-constructed relationship, shaped by clear communication, trust, and shared responsibilities, with informal caregivers recognized as integral participants. Outcomes included strengthened professional identity and satisfaction for nurses and improved emotional well-being, self-care, and self-efficacy for care recipients.

conclusionIn PC, mutuality transforms task-oriented interactions into meaningful, trust-based relationships, enhancing patient-centered communication and shared decision-making. Care continuity and autonomy, combined with investment in relational skills, are essential to sustain mutuality, improve communication, and enhance care quality.

Indexed as

Nurse-Patient RelationsAdultAgedCommunicationContinuity of Patient CareFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareQualitative Researchcontinuity of patient carehome care servicesnurse–patient relationsqualitative researchtrust

Identifiers

PMID42093074
PMCPMC13149776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.