Perception, Practice, and Predictors of Discharge Planning Among Nurses in Oncology Settings: A Cross‐Sectional Study

Background Discharge planning (DP) is a critical component of oncology care, with nurses serving as key coordinators by providing patient education and transitional support. The complexity of cancer treatment highlights the need for structured and individualized DP. Purposes This study aimed to assess nurses’ perceptions and practices of DP in oncology settings and explore the relationship between them. It also aimed to identify the predictors of effective DP. Methods A descriptive correlational design was employed, involving a convenience sample of 194 registered nurses from oncology units in two Jordanian hospitals. Data were collected using self‐reported instruments, including a sociodemographic form, DP questionnaire, and DP of ward nurses (DPWN) scale. Results Approximately, half of the nurses reported a positive DP perception. Most participants perceived DP as beneficial ( n = 169, 87.1%), useful ( n = 158, 81.4%), and appropriate for implementation in their unit ( n = 103, 53.1%). Nurses’ perception of DP was significantly associated with hospital type and having a standardized DP process ( p < 0.001). The overall mean DP practice score was 4.52 (SD 1.01), indicating generally favorable level of practice. Among the DPWN subscales, support for decision‐making received the highest mean rating ( M = 4.58, SD = 1.07), while utilization of social resources was rated the lowest ( M = 4.41, SD = 1.22). DP practice scores differed significantly by hospital type, nurse‐to‐patient ratio, and whether the nurse had received education in DP. There was a weak but statistically significant positive association between nurses’ perception and their DP practice ( r = 0.216, p = 0.003). Hospital type, the nurse‐to‐patient ratio, and DP perception were significant predictors of nurses’ DP practices. Conclusions The findings highlight the importance of context‐specific strategies to improve DP practices, including institutional support, appropriate staffing ratios, and oncology‐focused training programs.