| 1. |
- Kirvalidze, Mariam, et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of integrated person-centered interventions for older people's care : Review of Swedish experiences and experts' perspective
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Internal Medicine. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0954-6820 .- 1365-2796.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Older adults have multiple medical and social care needs, requiring a shift toward an integrated person-centered model of care. Our objective was to describe and summarize Swedish experiences of integrated person-centered care by reviewing studies published between 2000 and 2023, and to identify the main challenges and scientific gaps through expert discussions. Seventy-three publications were identified by searching MEDLINE and contacting experts. Interventions were categorized using two World Health Organization frameworks: (1) Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE), and (2) Integrated People-Centered Health Services (IPCHS). The included 73 publications were derived from 31 unique and heterogeneous interventions pertaining mainly to the micro- and meso-levels. Among publications measuring mortality, 15% were effective. Subjective health outcomes showed improvement in 24% of publications, morbidity outcomes in 42%, disability outcomes in 48%, and service utilization outcomes in 58%. Workshop discussions in Stockholm (Sweden), March 2023, were recorded, transcribed, and summarized. Experts emphasized: (1) lack of rigorous evaluation methods, (2) need for participatory designs, (3) scarcity of macro-level interventions, and (4) importance of transitioning from person- to people-centered integrated care. These challenges could explain the unexpected weak beneficial effects of the interventions on health outcomes, whereas service utilization outcomes were more positively impacted. Finally, we derived a list of recommendations, including the need to engage care organizations in interventions from their inception and to leverage researchers' scientific expertise. Although this review provides a comprehensive snapshot of interventions in the context of Sweden, the findings offer transferable perspectives on the real-world challenges encountered in this field. image
|
|
| 2. |
- Andersson, Viktor, 1994, et al.
(författare)
-
Relating person-centredness to quality-of-life assessments and patient-reported outcomes in healthcare: A critical theoretical discussion
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Nursing Philosophy. - : Wiley. - 1466-7681 .- 1466-769X. ; 23:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Engagement with the historical and theoretical underpinnings of measuring quality of life (QoL) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in healthcare is important. Ideas and values that shape such practices—and in the endgame, people's lives—might otherwise remain unexamined, be taken for granted or even essentialized. Our aim is to explicate and theoretically discuss the philosophical tenets underlying the practices of QoL assessment and PRO measurement in relation to the notion of person-centredness. First, we engage with the late-modern history of the concept of QoL and the act of assessing and measuring it. Working with the historical method of genealogy, we describe the development of both QoL assessments and PRO measures (PROMs) within healthcare by accounting for the contextual conditions for their possibility. In this way, the historical and philosophical underpinnings of these measurement practices are highlighted. We move on to analyse theoretical and philosophical underpinnings regarding the use of PROMs and QoL assessments in clinical practice, as demonstrated in review studies thereof. Finally, we offer a critical analysis regarding the state of theory in the literature and conclude that, although improved person-centredness is an implied driver of QoL assessments and PROMs in clinical practice, enhanced theoretical underpinning of the development of QoL assessments is called for.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Böling, Susanna, et al.
(författare)
-
No ordinary consultation : a qualitative inquiry of hospital palliative care consultation services
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Health Organization and Management. - : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. - 1477-7266. ; 34:6, s. 621-638
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose – Considering the great need for palliative care in hospitals, it is essential for hospital staff to havepalliative care knowledge. Palliative consultations have been shown to have positive effects on in-hospital care.However, barriers to contact with and uptake of palliative consultation advice are reported, posing a need forfurther knowledge about the process of palliative consultations. The purpose of this study therefore was toexamine how palliative consultations in hospitals are practised, as perceived by consultants and health careprofessionals on receiving wards.Design/methodology/approach – Focus groups with palliative care consultation services, health carepersonnel from receiving wards and managers of consultation services. Interpretive description and constantcomparative method guided the analysis.No ordinaryconsultationThe authors would like to thank participating colleagues for sharing their knowledge and experiencesabout palliative consultations.Ethics approval and consent to participate: The project received ethical approval from the SwedishEthical Review Authority, No. 809–16. Informed consent preceded participation for all of the participants.Consent for publication: Not applicable.Availability of data and material: The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are notpublicly available due to the inclusion of potentially sensitive individual data about health status. Theethical approval includes a statement that the data will be kept in a private repository but are availablefromthe corresponding author on reasonable request.Funding: Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg.Authors' contributions: JO, HB and JB planned the study. All authors conducted focus group €interviews. Analysis and interpretation of focus group data was performed by SB with support from JO, €HB and JB. SB wrote the first draft of the manuscript, JO, HB and JB commented on the manuscript and €contributed to the final version. The final manuscript was read and approved by all authors.Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:https://www.emerald.com/insight/1477-7266.htmReceived 14 April 2020Revised 24 June 2020Accepted 2 July 2020Journal of Health Organization andManagement© Emerald Publishing Limited1477-7266DOI 10.1108/JHOM-04-2020-0130Findings – Variations were seen in several aspects of practice, including approach to practice and representedprofessions. The palliative consultants were perceived to contribute by creating space for palliative care,adding palliative knowledge and approach, enhancing cooperation and creating opportunity to amelioratetransition. Based on a perception of carrying valuable perspectives and knowledge, a number of consultationservices utilised proactive practices that took the initiative in relation to the receiving wards.Originality/value – A lack of policy and divergent views on how to conceptualise palliative care appeared tobe associated with variations in consultation practices, tentative approaches and a bottom-up drivendevelopment. This study adds knowledge, implying theoretical transferability as to how palliative careconsultations can be practised, which is useful when designing and starting new consultation services.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Feldthusen, Caroline, 1977, et al.
(författare)
-
Centredness in health care: A systematic overview of reviews
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Health Expectations. - : Wiley. - 1369-6513 .- 1369-7625. ; 25:3, s. 885-901
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction The introduction of effective, evidence-based approaches to centredness in health care is hindered by the fact that research results are not easily accessible. This is partly due to the large volume of publications available and because the field is closely linked to and in some ways encompasses adjoining fields of research, for example, shared decision making and narrative medicine. In an attempt to survey the field of centredness in health care, a systematic overview of reviews was conducted with the purpose of illuminating how centredness in health care is presented in current reviews. Methods Searches for relevant reviews were conducted in the databases PubMed, Scopus, Cinahl, PsychINFO, Web of Science and EMBASE using terms connected to centredness in health care. Filters specific to review studies of all types and for inclusion of only English language results as well as a time frame of January 2017-December 2018, were applied. Results The search strategy identified 3697 unique reviews, of which 31 were included in the study. The synthesis of the results from the 31 reviews identified three interrelated main themes: Attributes of centredness (what centredness is), Translation from theory into practice (how centredness is done) and Evaluation of effects (possible ways of measuring effects of centredness). Three main attributes of centeredness found were: being unique, being heard and shared responsibility. Aspects involved in translating theory into practice were sufficient prerequisites, strategies for action and tools used in safeguarding practice. Further, a variety and breadth of measures of effects were found in the included reviews. Conclusions Our synthesis demonstrates that current synthesized research literature on centredness in health care is broad, as it focuses both on explorations of the conceptual basis and the practice, as well as measures of effects. This study provides an understanding of the commonalities identified in the reviews on centredness in healthcare overall, ranging from theory to practice and from practice to evaluation. Patient or Public Contribution Patient representatives were involved during the initiation of the project and in decisions about its focus, although no patient or public representatives made direct contributions to the review process.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
