患者是复杂慢性病患者的知识伙伴。

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Vox Jo Hsu, Megan Moodie, Abigail A Dumes, Emily Lim Rogers, Chelsey Carter, Emma Broder, Daisy Couture, Ilana Löwy, Emily Mendenhall
{"title":"患者是复杂慢性病患者的知识伙伴。","authors":"Vox Jo Hsu, Megan Moodie, Abigail A Dumes, Emily Lim Rogers, Chelsey Carter, Emma Broder, Daisy Couture, Ilana Löwy, Emily Mendenhall","doi":"10.1136/medhum-2024-012957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article conveys how taking patient knowledge seriously can improve patient experience and further medical science. In clinical contexts related to infection-associated chronic conditions and other complex chronic illnesses, patient knowledge is often undervalued, even when clinicians have limited training in diagnosing and treating a particular condition. Despite growing acknowledgement of the importance of patients as 'stakeholders', clinicians and medical researchers have yet to fully develop ways to evaluate and, when appropriate, meaningfully incorporate patient knowledge-experiential, scientific, social scientific, historical or otherwise-into clinical practice and research. We argue that there are opportunities for clinicians and researchers to collaborate with patients and colleagues from the social sciences and humanities. We use two examples to demonstrate why patient knowledge should inform medical engagement with chronic and complex conditions. The first comes from a disability studies scholar who describes the social biases that can sideline patient expertise, and the second is from an anthropologist whose reading in medical humanities led to an effective treatment for her recovery. Rather than merely acknowledging 'lived experience', clinical and research teams should include patients with complex chronic conditions as 'knowledge partners'. These patients occupy unique and valuable epistemological positions, and their knowledge should be considered with as much openness and rigour as other forms of medical knowledge. As more medical schools, residency programmes and hospitals emphasise the need for 'deep listening' and patient input, we encourage meaningful engagement with patients whose insights can provide crucial knowledge for clinical and scientific advancement.</p>","PeriodicalId":46435,"journal":{"name":"Medical Humanities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patients as knowledge partners in the context of complex chronic conditions.\",\"authors\":\"Vox Jo Hsu, Megan Moodie, Abigail A Dumes, Emily Lim Rogers, Chelsey Carter, Emma Broder, Daisy Couture, Ilana Löwy, Emily Mendenhall\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/medhum-2024-012957\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article conveys how taking patient knowledge seriously can improve patient experience and further medical science. In clinical contexts related to infection-associated chronic conditions and other complex chronic illnesses, patient knowledge is often undervalued, even when clinicians have limited training in diagnosing and treating a particular condition. Despite growing acknowledgement of the importance of patients as 'stakeholders', clinicians and medical researchers have yet to fully develop ways to evaluate and, when appropriate, meaningfully incorporate patient knowledge-experiential, scientific, social scientific, historical or otherwise-into clinical practice and research. We argue that there are opportunities for clinicians and researchers to collaborate with patients and colleagues from the social sciences and humanities. We use two examples to demonstrate why patient knowledge should inform medical engagement with chronic and complex conditions. The first comes from a disability studies scholar who describes the social biases that can sideline patient expertise, and the second is from an anthropologist whose reading in medical humanities led to an effective treatment for her recovery. Rather than merely acknowledging 'lived experience', clinical and research teams should include patients with complex chronic conditions as 'knowledge partners'. These patients occupy unique and valuable epistemological positions, and their knowledge should be considered with as much openness and rigour as other forms of medical knowledge. As more medical schools, residency programmes and hospitals emphasise the need for 'deep listening' and patient input, we encourage meaningful engagement with patients whose insights can provide crucial knowledge for clinical and scientific advancement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46435,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Humanities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2024-012957\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2024-012957","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章介绍了认真对待患者知识如何改善患者体验并促进医学科学发展。在与感染相关的慢性疾病和其他复杂的慢性疾病相关的临床环境中,患者的知识往往被低估,即使临床医生在诊断和治疗特定疾病方面接受过有限的培训。尽管越来越多的人认识到患者作为 "利益相关者 "的重要性,但临床医生和医学研究人员尚未充分开发出评估患者知识(经验、科学、社会科学、历史或其他方面的知识)的方法,也未在适当的时候将患者知识有意义地纳入临床实践和研究中。我们认为,临床医生和研究人员有机会与患者以及社会科学和人文学科的同事合作。我们用两个例子来说明为什么患者的知识应该为医学界参与慢性和复杂疾病的治疗提供信息。第一个例子来自一位残疾研究学者,她描述了社会偏见可能使患者的专业知识处于边缘地位;第二个例子来自一位人类学家,她通过阅读医学人文书籍获得了有效的康复治疗方法。临床和研究团队不应仅仅承认 "生活经验",而应将患有复杂慢性疾病的患者视为 "知识伙伴"。这些患者在认识论上占据着独特而宝贵的地位,他们的知识应该像其他形式的医学知识一样得到开放而严谨的考虑。随着越来越多的医学院、住院医师培训项目和医院强调 "深度倾听 "和患者意见的必要性,我们鼓励与患者进行有意义的接触,他们的见解可以为临床和科学进步提供重要的知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patients as knowledge partners in the context of complex chronic conditions.

This article conveys how taking patient knowledge seriously can improve patient experience and further medical science. In clinical contexts related to infection-associated chronic conditions and other complex chronic illnesses, patient knowledge is often undervalued, even when clinicians have limited training in diagnosing and treating a particular condition. Despite growing acknowledgement of the importance of patients as 'stakeholders', clinicians and medical researchers have yet to fully develop ways to evaluate and, when appropriate, meaningfully incorporate patient knowledge-experiential, scientific, social scientific, historical or otherwise-into clinical practice and research. We argue that there are opportunities for clinicians and researchers to collaborate with patients and colleagues from the social sciences and humanities. We use two examples to demonstrate why patient knowledge should inform medical engagement with chronic and complex conditions. The first comes from a disability studies scholar who describes the social biases that can sideline patient expertise, and the second is from an anthropologist whose reading in medical humanities led to an effective treatment for her recovery. Rather than merely acknowledging 'lived experience', clinical and research teams should include patients with complex chronic conditions as 'knowledge partners'. These patients occupy unique and valuable epistemological positions, and their knowledge should be considered with as much openness and rigour as other forms of medical knowledge. As more medical schools, residency programmes and hospitals emphasise the need for 'deep listening' and patient input, we encourage meaningful engagement with patients whose insights can provide crucial knowledge for clinical and scientific advancement.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Humanities
Medical Humanities HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Occupational and Environmental Medicine (OEM) is an international peer reviewed journal concerned with areas of current importance in occupational medicine and environmental health issues throughout the world. Original contributions include epidemiological, physiological and psychological studies of occupational and environmental health hazards as well as toxicological studies of materials posing human health risks. A CPD/CME series aims to help visitors in continuing their professional development. A World at Work series describes workplace hazards and protetctive measures in different workplaces worldwide. A correspondence section provides a forum for debate and notification of preliminary findings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信