BackgroundThe purpose of this scoping review was to describe how three tenants of patient-centered care provision: communication, partnership, and health promotion are addressed in patient-centered care models/frameworks across the literature.MethodsA scoping review of literature published in English since 1990 was conducted using Medline, CINAHL, and EMBASE. A key term search strategy was employed using “patient-centered care”, “client-centered care”, “framework” and “model” to identify relevant studies.ResultsApplication of the search strategy resulted in a hit total of 101 articles. Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria, of which 12 were review articles; 5 were qualitative research papers; one was a randomized control trial; and one was a prospective study. From these articles, 25 different patient-centered care frameworks/models were identified.ConclusionsThe fact that all identified approaches to patient-centered care incorporated strategies to achieve effective communication, partnership, and health promotion indicates that clinicians can select a patient-centered approach from the literature that best suits their patient’s needs, and be confident that it will satisfy the three core elements of patient-centered care provision. While empirical literature on specific patient-centric frameworks and models was limited, much empiric evidence was sourced for the most consistently defined component of patient-centered care, communication.

Collaborative goal-setting. Collaborative goal-setting involves patients working with their clinicians to develop health outcome goals together and is a fundamental component of patient-centered care. Some rehabilitation disciplines have yet to fully embrace collaborative goal-setting due to feasibility issues. This article proposes that the integration of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) into goal-setting practices could standardize collaborative goal-setting in a way that would address these feasibility issues.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundReaching overhead and reading are tasks that many individuals encounter daily. The level of difficulty of these tasks increases if an individual has neck pain. This study determined the neck movement patterns during these two tasks by comparing neck flexion of individuals with and without neck pain.MethodsThis case control study used the portable video technology, Dartfish ProSuite 5.5 Video Software, to analyse neck flexion movement patterns. Healthy individuals and individuals with neck pain were videotaped while they completed two tasks: reaching overhead from a standing position and reading from a sitting position. A single position of interest was selected for analysis from both tasks. The degree of neck flexion presented by the participant in this position at the beginning and end of the task was recorded. The angle change between these two time points was calculated for each participant. Differences between groups were determined by comparing the average flexion angle changes in groups by t-tests.ResultsThe average angle change experienced by controls and neck pain participants during the overhead reaching tasks were very similar and a significant difference was not observed. The average angle changes experienced by the two groups during the reading task were more variable, but not significantly different. A t-test comparing average neck flexion angle change during dominant arm elevation for controls (m = −5.28˚, sd = 31.14) and neck pain participants (m = 5.07˚, sd = 32.41) revealed a mean between group difference of −10.34˚ (t17 = −0.688, p = 0.5003). The average neck flexion angle change during long neck flexion was not statistically different between controls (m = 10.08˚, sd = 18.89) and neck pain participants (m = 4˚, sd = 18.18); although the mean between group difference was 6.08˚ (t17 = 0.6856, p = 0.5022).ConclusionsTask performance is highly variable between individuals making it difficult to assess the impact of neck pain on small samples even with detailed motion analysis. Despite this, there was a difference in neck posture during reaching activities between controls and patients with neck pain. Neck pain can therefore influence the movement patterns used during daily activities. This has implications for primary and secondary prevention.