A Narrative Synthesis of the Components of and Evidence for Patient- and Family-Centered Care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gallo KP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5555419 | biostudies-other | 2016 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Health care organizations increasingly strive to deliver care that is both evidence based and patient centered. Although often complementary, fundamental contradictions may exist between these goals, and the organizational culture and infrastructure necessary to be successful in one domain may inherently diminish performance in the other. We assessed the relationship between evidence-based practice (EBP) and patient-centered care (PCC) by seeking to identify specific behavioral and process mechanisms, along with organizational characteristics that distinguish medical centers that are able to provide inpatient care that is both evidence based and patient centered from those where performance is either mixed or low in both domains. We analyzed interview data from 142 employees at 12 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers selected based on EBP and PCC performance (high, low, or mixed) using a priori constructs consistent with organizational literature, as well as emergent themes. We confirmed that tensions may arise when attempting to deliver both EBP and PCC and found unique characteristics of organizations that do both well. High-performing sites exhibited organizational cultures of empowerment where both EBP and PCC expectations were emphasized; provided formal and informal institutional supports and structures with regard to PCC and EBP; and fostered multidisciplinary, multidirectional approaches to care and communication that facilitated delivery of both EBP and PCC. Organizations that excel in providing both EBP and PCC exhibit unique characteristics and processes. Recognizing that some characteristics such as culture are difficult to change, these findings nonetheless highlight areas that could be enhanced by medical centers striving to deliver care that is both evidence based and patient centered.
| S-EPMC8162222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Poor adherence to statins increases cardiovascular disease risk. We systematically identified 32 controlled studies that assessed patient-centered interventions designed to improve statin adherence. The limited number of studies and variation in study characteristics precluded strict quality criteria or meta-analysis. Cognitive education or behavioural counselling delivered face-to-face multiple times consistently improved statin adherence compared with control groups (7/8 and 3/3 studies, respectively). None of four studies using medication reminders and/or adherence feedback alone reported significantly improved statin adherence. Single interventions that improved statin adherence but were not conducted face-to-face included cognitive education in the form of genetic test results (two studies) and cognitive education via a website (one study). Similar mean adherence measures were reported for 17 intervention arms and were thus compared in a sub-analysis: 8 showed significantly improved statin adherence, but effect sizes were modest (+7 to +22 % points). In three of these studies, statin adherence improved despite already being high in the control group (82-89 vs. 57-69 % in the other studies). These three studies were the only studies in this sub-analysis to include cognitive education delivered face-to-face multiple times (plus other interventions). In summary, the most consistently effective interventions for improving adherence to statins have modest effects and are resource-intensive. Research is needed to determine whether modern communications, particularly mobile health platforms (recently shown to improve medication adherence in other chronic diseases), can replicate or even enhance the successful elements of these interventions while using less time and fewer resources.
| S-EPMC5047948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFollowing implementation of the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), access to primary care improved. However, understanding of how this occurred is lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the association between organizational aspects of the PCMH model and access-related initiatives with patient perception of access to urgent, same-day, and routine care within the VA.DesignCross-sectional PARTICIPANTS: Veterans who responded to the annual Survey of Healthcare Experiences of Patients in 2016 (N = 241,122 patients) and primary staff who responded to VA National Primary Care Provider and Staff Survey (N = 4815 staff).Main measuresThree outcomes of perception of access: percentage of patients responding in the highest category for same-day care (waiting ≤ 1 day), urgent care (always receiving care when needed), and routine care (always receiving checkups when desired). Predictors were staff-level report of access-related initiatives and organizational factors in the clinic. We used generalized estimating equations to model associations, adjusting for characteristics of patients and their respective clinics.Key resultsAccess was significantly better in clinics where staff reviewed performance reports (+ 0.9% in the highest perception of access for urgent care, P < 0.01; + 1.2% for routine care, P < 0.001), leadership was supportive of the PCMH (+ 1.6% for urgent care, P < 0.01), and initiatives to improve access included open access (+ 0.8% to + 1.7% across all outcomes, P < 0.01) and telehealth visits (+ 1.2% to + 1.4%, P < 0.001). Perceived access was worse in clinics with moderate staff burnout (- 1.1% to - 1.4%, P < 0.001), primary care provider turnover during the past year (- 1.0% to - 1.6%, P < 0.001), or medical support assistant turnover in the past year (- 0.9% to - 1.4%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsPerception of access was strongly associated with identifiable organizational factors and access-related initiatives within VA primary care clinics that could be adopted by other health systems.
| S-EPMC7280463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health-care service delivery models have evolved from a practitioner-centered approach toward a patient-centered ideal. Concurrently, increasing emphasis has been placed on the use of empirical evidence in decision-making to increase clinical accountability. The way in which clinicians use empirical evidence and client preferences to inform decision-making provides an insight into health-care delivery models utilized in clinical practice. The present study aimed to investigate the sources of information audiologists use when discussing rehabilitation choices with clients, and discuss the findings within the context of evidence-based practice and patient-centered care. To assess the changes that may have occurred over time, this study uses a questionnaire based on one of the few studies of decision-making behavior in audiologists, published in 1989. The present questionnaire was completed by 96 audiologists who attended the World Congress of Audiology in 2014. The responses were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative approaches. Results suggest that audiologists rank clinical test results and client preferences as the most important factors for decision-making. Discussion with colleagues or experts was also frequently reported as an important source influencing decision-making. Approximately 20% of audiologists mentioned utilizing research evidence to inform decision-making when no clear solution was available. Information shared at conferences was ranked low in terms of importance and reliability. This study highlights an increase in awareness of concepts associated with evidence-based practice and patient-centered care within audiology settings, consistent with current research-to-practice dissemination pathways. It also highlights that these pathways may not be sufficient for an effective clinical implementation of these practices.
| S-EPMC5536381 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) is increasingly linked to improved communication, care quality, and patient decision making. However, in order to consistently implement and study PFCC, health care systems and researchers need a solid evidentiary base. Most current definitions and models of PFCC are broad and conceptual, and difficult to translate into measurable behaviors and actions. This paper provides a brief overview of all actions that focus group respondents associated with PFCC in ambulatory (outpatient) care settings and then explores actions associated with the concept of "dignity and respect" in greater detail. METHODS:We conducted nine focus groups with patients, family members, and physicians in three metropolitan regions across the United States. Group discussions were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS:We identified 14 domains and 47 specific actions that patients, family members, and physicians associate with PFCC. In addition to providing a detailed matrix of these domains and actions, this paper details the actions associated with the "dignity and respect" concept. Key domains identified under "dignity and respect" include: 1) building relationships, 2) providing individualized care, and 3) respecting patients' time. Within these domains we identified specific actions that break down these abstract ideas into explicit and measurable units such as taking time, listening, including family, and minimizing wait times. We identified 9, 6, and 3 specific actions associated, respectively, with building relationships, providing individualized care, and respecting patients' time. CONCLUSIONS:Our work fills a critical gap in our ability to understand and measure PFCC in ambulatory care settings by breaking down abstract concepts about PFCC into specific measurable actions. Our findings can be used to support research on how PFCC affects clinical outcomes and develop innovative tools and policies to support PFCC.
| S-EPMC6388493 | biostudies-other
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Patient- and family-centered care (PFCC), which recognizes the family as an integral partner in high-quality clinical decision-making, is important to improving children's health care. Studies examining PFCC disparities in the general US pediatric population, however, are sparse, and use methodology that might mislead readers to overestimate effect sizes because of the high prevalence of high-quality PFCC. We address these issues using improved statistical modeling of conceptually-grounded disparity domains on more recent data. METHODS:This study examined 22,942 children in the 2011 to 2013 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (pooled cross-section) with at least 1 health care visit in the previous year (eligible for PFCC questions). We used robust-adjusted multivariable Poisson regression to estimate prevalence rate ratios-closer estimates of true risk ratios of highly prevalent outcomes-of 4 measures of high-quality PFCC and a composite measure. RESULTS:Overall, PFCC quality prevalences were high, ranging from 95% to 97% across the 4 PFCC measures with 92% of parents reporting the composite measure. In multivariable analyses, lower prevalence of high-quality PFCC was consistently observed among publicly insured children (relative to the privately insured, prevalence rate ratios ranging from 0.978 to 0.984 across the PFCC measures; 0.962 in the composite) and children living in families below the poverty line (children at ≥400% of the poverty line had 1.018-1.045 times the prevalence of high-quality PFCC across the PFCC measures; 1.056 in the composite). CONCLUSIONS:Although prevalence rate ratio methodology revealed smaller and perhaps clinically insignificant disparities in US children's PFCC quality than previously portrayed, nonetheless, several statistically significant disparities remain. The most consistent disparities identify those most vulnerable to PFCC quality: publicly insured and impoverished children.
| S-EPMC6333206 | biostudies-other
Project description:Objective:The goal of this scoping review was to collect data on patient- and family-centered care (PFCC) programs and initiatives that have included the direct involvement of librarians and information professionals to determine how librarians are involved in PFCC and highlight opportunities for librarians to support PFCC programs. Methods:Systematic literature searches were conducted in seven scholarly databases in the information, medical, and social sciences. Studies were included if they (1) described initiatives presented explicitly as PFCC programs and (2) involved an information professional or librarian in the PFCC initiative or program. Based on the definition of PFCC provided by the Institute for Patient- and Family-Centered Care, the authors developed a custom code sheet to organize data elements into PFCC categories or initiatives and outcomes. Other extracted data elements included how the information professional became involved in the program and a narrative description of the initiatives or programs. Results:All included studies (n=12) identified patient education or information-sharing as an integral component of their PFCC initiatives. Librarians were noted to contribute to shared decision-making through direct patient consultation, provision of health literacy education, and information delivery to both provider and patient with the goal of fostering collaborative communication. Conclusions:The synthesis of available evidence to date suggests that librarians and information professionals should focus on patient education and information-sharing to support both patients or caregivers and clinical staff. The burgeoning efforts in participatory care and inclusion of patients in the decision-making process pose a unique opportunity for librarians and information professionals to offer more personalized information services.
| S-EPMC6579588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Touted by some as reflecting a better medical model and cited by the influential IOM report in 2000 as one of the six domains of quality care, patient-centered medicine has yet to fully establish its scientific attributes or to become mainstream. One proposed reason is failure to behaviorally define what the term 'patient-centered' actually means. OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify patient-centered articles among all reported randomized controlled trials (RCT); (2) to identify those with specific behaviorally defined interventions; (3) to identify commonalities among the behavioral definitions; and (4) to evaluate the relationship of the well-defined RCTs to patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Medline from April 2010 to 1975. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: RCTs having any specific, behaviorally defined patient-centered skill(s) in an intervention with some patient outcome involving real adult patients and providers in real clinical situations. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Critical appraisal via narrative review. RESULTS: The prevalence of any mention of patient-centeredness among 327,219 RCTs was 0.50% (1,475 studies), from which we identified only 13 studies (0.90%) where there were behaviorally-defined patient-centered skills in an intervention. Although there were too few studies to make clinical recommendations, we identified common features of the behavioral definitions used: all went well beyond identifying individual skills. Rather, skills were grouped, prioritized, and sequenced by virtually all, often describing a stepwise patient-centered approach to, variously, gather data, address emotions, or inform and motivate. LIMITATIONS: The inherent subjectivity of our method for identifying behaviorally-defined studies could under- or over-represent truly replicable such studies considerably. Also, studies were few and very heterogeneous with interventions of widely differing intensity and foci. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: RCTs identified as patient-centered were rare, and <1% of these were behaviorally defined and, therefore, possibly replicable. There were many common behavioral definitions in the studies reported, and these can guide us in identifying agreed-upon patient-centered interventions, the immediate next-step in advancing the field.
| S-EPMC3019332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEngaging patients and family members as partners in research increases the relevance of study results and enhances patient-centered care; how to best engage patients and families in research is unknown.MethodsWe tested a novel research approach that engages and trains patients and family members as researchers to see if we could understand and describe the experiences of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and their families. Former patients and family members conducted focus groups and interviews with patients (n = 11) and families of surviving (n = 14) and deceased (n = 7) patients from 13 ICUs in Alberta Canada, and analyzed data using conventional content analysis. Separate blinded qualitative researchers conducted an independent analysis.ResultsParticipants described three phases in the patient/family "ICU journey"; admission to ICU, daily care in ICU, and post-ICU experience. Admission to ICU was characterized by family shock and disorientation with families needing the presence and support of a provider. Participants described five important elements of daily care: honoring the patient's voice, the need to know, decision-making, medical care, and culture in ICU. The post-ICU experience was characterized by the challenges of the transition from ICU to a hospital ward and long-term effects of critical illness. These "ICU journey" experiences were described as integral to appropriate interactions with the care team and comfort and trust in the ICU, which were perceived as essential for a community of caring. Participants provided suggestions for improvement: 1) provide a dedicated family navigator, 2) increase provider awareness of the fragility of family trust, 3) improve provider communication skills, 4) improve the transition from ICU to hospital ward, and 5) inform patients about the long-term effects of critical illness. Analyses by independent qualitative researchers identified similar themes.ConclusionsPatient and family member-led research is feasible and can identify opportunities for improving care.
| S-EPMC4975402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-centered care (PCC) is an emerging priority in many healthcare settings but lacks clarity in the emergency department (ED). It is of interest to know what PCC practices are most important to patients to better their experience. The objective of this study was to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review of PCC in the ED.MethodsWe used stakeholder and patient engagement to consult with clinicians, subject-matter experts, patient partners, and community organizations to determine patient needs. We examined all articles in the ED context with PCC as the intervention. Two independent reviewers screened 3136 articles and 13 were included. A meta-ethnographic analysis was conducted to determine common themes of PCC.ResultsThemes included emotional support, communication, education, involvement of patient/family in information sharing and decision making, comfort of environment, respect and trust, continuity, and transition of care. Challenges in the ED reflected a lack of PCC. Moreover, implementation of PCC had many benefits including higher patient satisfaction with their care. Though there were commonalities of PCC components, there was no consistently used definition for PCC in the ED.ConclusionThe findings of this review support the evidence that PCC is of high value to the ED setting and should be standardized in practice.
| S-EPMC9367087 | biostudies-literature