Aims and objectives This study explores how the term patient-centred care is understood, particularly by those who are involved in translating the concept from a theoretical idea into a practical application. It examines the ways in which intermediate level stakeholders such as health service managers, educationalists, professional leaders and officers of patient bodies understand and promote patient-centred care among health professionals actually delivering patient care.Design Qualitative interview study.Setting and participants Interviewees were drawn from groups and organizations from four categories: health agencies and regulatory bodies, Royal Colleges and other professional bodies, educational institutions, patient and user groups and consumer organizations.Main variables studied The meanings and understandings of patient-centred care, commitment to implementing patient-centred care and barriers and opportunities to implementation.Results and conclusions Patient-centred care covers a range of activities from patient involvement in individual care to public involvement in health policy decisions. Current Department of Health policy has made patient-centred care a priority, but has not clarified exactly what it means. Thus, health professionals, educationalists, managers and patient representatives have all developed different meanings of patient-centred care to reflect their own particular backgrounds and roles. The individual aspects of patient-centred care have been neglected in policy terms and important research findings have not been incorporated into policies to change the attitudes and behaviours of health professionals. Developing a shared understanding of patientcentred care which encompasses all its components is an important role for the new Commission for Patient and Public Involvement.
This confirms the need for treatment policies to focus on reducing the risk of such complications and hence improve patients' HrQoL.
BackgroundThis project examines the organisation and delivery of health improvement activities by and within general practice and the primary health-care team. The project was designed to examine who delivers these interventions, where they are located, what approaches are developed in practices, how individual practices and the primary health-care team organise such public health activities, and how these contribute to health improvement. Our focus was on health promotion and ill-health prevention activities.AimsThe aim of this scoping exercise was to identify the current extent of knowledge about the health improvement activities in general practice and the wider primary health-care team. The key objectives were to provide an overview of the range and type of health improvement activities, identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further empirical research. Our specific research objectives were to map the range and type of health improvement activity undertaken by general practice staff and the primary health-care team based within general practice; to scope the literature on health improvement in general practice or undertaken by health-care staff based in general practice and identify gaps in the evidence base; to synthesise the literature and identify effective approaches to the delivery and organisation of health improvement interventions in a general practice setting; and to identify the priority areas for research as defined by those working in general practice.MethodsWe undertook a comprehensive search of the literature. We followed a staged selection process involving reviews of titles and abstracts. This resulted in the identification of 1140 papers for data extraction, with 658 of these papers selected for inclusion in the review, of which 347 were included in the evidence synthesis. We also undertook 45 individual and two group interviews with primary health-care staff.FindingsMany of the research studies reviewed had some details about the type, process or location, or who provided the intervention. Generally, however, little attention is paid in the literature to examining the impact of the organisational context on the way services are delivered or how this affects the effectiveness of health improvement interventions in general practice. We found that the focus of attention is mainly on individual prevention approaches, with practices engaging in both primary and secondary prevention. The range of activities suggests that general practitioners do not take a population approach but focus on individual patients. However, it is clear that many general practitioners see health promotion as an integral part of practice, whether as individual approaches to primary or secondary health improvement or as a practice-based approach to improving the health of their patients. Our key conclusion is that there is currently insufficient good evidence to support many of the health improvement interventions undertaken in general practice and primary care more widely.Future ResearchFuture research on health improvement in general practice and by the primary health-care team needs to move beyond clinical research to include delivery systems and be conducted in a primary care setting. More research needs to examine areas where there are chronic disease burdens – cancer, dementia and other disabilities of old age. Reviews should be commissioned that examine the whole prevention pathway for health problems that are managed within primary care drawing together research from general practice, pharmacy, community engagement, etc.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
This paper reports the findings of a scoping review on the organisation and delivery of health improvement activities in general practice and the primary healthcare team. The project was designed to examine who delivers these interventions, where they are located, what approaches are developed in practices and how individual practices and the primary healthcare team organise such public health activities and how these contribute to health improvement. Our focus was on health promotion and prevention activities and aimed to identify the current extent of knowledge about the health improvement activities in general practice and the wider primary healthcare team. Many of the research studies reviewed had some details about the type, process, location or who provided the intervention. Little attention is paid in the literature to examining the impact of the organisational context on the way services are delivered or how this affects the effectiveness of health improvement interventions in general practice. We found that the focus of attention is mainly on individual prevention approaches with practices engaging in both primary and secondary prevention. Although many GPs do not take a population approach and focus on individual patients some do see health promotion as an integral part of practice - whether as individual approaches to primary or secondary health improvement or as a practice-based approach to improving the health of their patients. Based on our analysis we conclude that there is insufficient good evidence to support many of the health improvement interventions undertaken in general practice and primary care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.