Patient empowerment, patient participation and patient-centeredness in hospital care: A concept analysis based on a literature review

2016 ◽  
Vol 99 (12) ◽  
pp. 1923-1939 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Marie Castro ◽  
Tine Van Regenmortel ◽  
Kris Vanhaecht ◽  
Walter Sermeus ◽  
Ann Van Hecke
2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoinette Mary Fage-Butler ◽  
Matilde Nisbeth Jensen

Email communication is being integrated relatively slowly into doctor–patient communication. Patients have expressed enthusiasm for the medium, while doctors are generally more reluctant. As existing health communication models have characteristically assumed the copresence of doctor and patient and primarily reflect medical practitioners’ perspectives, their suitability in relation to email communication and patients’ perspectives warrants further investigation. Following a two-step process and using the methodology of the integrative literature review, 29 articles from 2004–2014 are analysed with the aim of investigating the advantages and disadvantages of the medium of email from the patient’s perspective. The findings are compared to the health communication models of biomedicine, patient-centeredness, patient education and patient empowerment to investigate these models’ relevance for doctor–patient email communication. Results show that patients identify numerous advantages with email communication, including improved convenience and access, more detailed informational exchanges, greater reflection opportunities, freedom from the medical gaze and the potential to level out power imbalances, as well as a number of primarily medium-related disadvantages. The findings indicate that email can counteract some of the communicative problems associated with biomedicine and suggest the ongoing relevance of aspects of the models of patient empowerment, patient-centeredness and patient education for email communication.


Author(s):  
Catherine Larocque ◽  
Wendy E. Peterson ◽  
Janet E. Squires ◽  
Martha Mason-Ward ◽  
Kelli Mayhew ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Karen Leme Bonuzzi ◽  
Rodrigo Marques da Silva ◽  
Kerolyn Ramos Garcia ◽  
Linconl Agudo Oliveira Benito ◽  
Leila Batista Ribeiro ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 205510291881531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiara Marzorati ◽  
Luca Bailo ◽  
Ketti Mazzocco ◽  
Gabriella Pravettoni

The caregivers’ perceptions of the patients’ health condition may be biased and induce them to perceive higher needs than patients actually disclose. Our aim was to assess if the level of knowledge and awareness about cancer disease and treatment, and patient participation and assistance differs between caregivers and patients. A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted across five countries (Italy, United Kingdom, Spain, France and Germany) on a total of 510 participants who directly (patient) or indirectly (caregiver) faced a cancer diagnosis. Investigating this divergence could help to identify possible difficulties in patient–caregiver relationship, eventually improving patient empowerment.


2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 187-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter P. Cheung ◽  
Maarten de Wit ◽  
Clifton O. Bingham ◽  
John R. Kirwan ◽  
Amye Leong ◽  
...  

Objective.Patient participation in research is increasing; however, practical guidelines to enhance this participation are lacking. Specifically within the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) organization, although patients have participated in OMERACT meetings since 2002, consensus about the procedures for involving patients in working groups has not been formalized. The objective is to develop a set of recommendations regarding patient research partner (PRP) involvement in research working groups.Methods.We conducted a systematic literature review on recommendations/guidelines of PRP involvement in research; elaborated a structured consensus process involving multiple participants to develop a set of recommendations; and sought endorsement of recommendations by OMERACT.Results.In the 18 articles included in the literature review, there was general agreement on the broad concepts for recommendations covering PRP involvement in research although they were heterogeneous in detail. Most considered PRP involvement in all phases of research with early engagement, training, and support important, but details on the content were scarce. This review informed a larger consensus-building process regarding PRP inclusion in OMERACT research. Three overarching principles and 8 recommendations were developed, discussed, and refined at OMERACT 2014. The guiding principles were endorsed during the OMERACT plenary session.Conclusion.These recommendations for PRP involvement in OMERACT research reinforce the importance of patient participation throughout the research process as integral members. Although the applicability of the recommendations in other research contexts should be assessed, the generalizability is expected to be high. Future research should evaluate their implementation and their effect on outcome development.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 612-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Oxelmark ◽  
Kerstin Ulin ◽  
Wendy Chaboyer ◽  
Tracey Bucknall ◽  
Mona Ringdal

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document