Patient participation-18 months of patient and staff perspectives in kidney care: A mixed methods study addressing the effects of facilitating staff person-centredness.
Caroline Hurtig, Liselott Årestedt, Fredrik Uhlin, Ann Catrine Eldh
{"title":"Patient participation-18 months of patient and staff perspectives in kidney care: A mixed methods study addressing the effects of facilitating staff person-centredness.","authors":"Caroline Hurtig, Liselott Årestedt, Fredrik Uhlin, Ann Catrine Eldh","doi":"10.1111/jep.14099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>Patient participation should encapsulate the individual's resources and needs, though such standards remain rationed for people living with a long-term health concern like kidney failure.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To illustrate what patient participation signified to patients and staff in kidney care, and whether an agreed or disagreed conceptualisation occurred over time, evaluating the influence of two study-specific interventions to facilitate more person-centred participation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>By convergent mixed methods design across 9 units in Sweden, we repeated the following data collection at 3 time points over 18 months: semistructured interviews with patients and staff (n = 72), and structured reviews for accounts of participation in patient records (n = 240). Data were subjected to content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. The outcomes were appraised for changes over time besides the interventions to enhance attention to patients' participation: a clinical tool and guidance distributed to management, and additional local support, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both patients and staff described patient participation as a comprehension of the disease and its management in everyday life. Yet, patients accentuated participation as one's experiences being recognised, and mutual knowledge exchange. Instead, staff emphasised the patients managing their treatment. The health records primarily represented what staff do to support their notion of patient participation. No influence of the interventions was noted, but what signified patient participation was maintained over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both patients and staff stress the importance of patient participation, although they focus on different elements. Further person-centred conduct warrants a shared conceptualisation and strategies addressing and scaffolding patients' preferences and means.</p>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.14099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rationale: Patient participation should encapsulate the individual's resources and needs, though such standards remain rationed for people living with a long-term health concern like kidney failure.
Aims: To illustrate what patient participation signified to patients and staff in kidney care, and whether an agreed or disagreed conceptualisation occurred over time, evaluating the influence of two study-specific interventions to facilitate more person-centred participation.
Method: By convergent mixed methods design across 9 units in Sweden, we repeated the following data collection at 3 time points over 18 months: semistructured interviews with patients and staff (n = 72), and structured reviews for accounts of participation in patient records (n = 240). Data were subjected to content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. The outcomes were appraised for changes over time besides the interventions to enhance attention to patients' participation: a clinical tool and guidance distributed to management, and additional local support, respectively.
Results: Both patients and staff described patient participation as a comprehension of the disease and its management in everyday life. Yet, patients accentuated participation as one's experiences being recognised, and mutual knowledge exchange. Instead, staff emphasised the patients managing their treatment. The health records primarily represented what staff do to support their notion of patient participation. No influence of the interventions was noted, but what signified patient participation was maintained over time.
Conclusion: Both patients and staff stress the importance of patient participation, although they focus on different elements. Further person-centred conduct warrants a shared conceptualisation and strategies addressing and scaffolding patients' preferences and means.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.