scholarly journals What Do Clinicians Who Deliver Maternity Services Think Patient-Centered Care Is and How Is That Different for Vulnerable Women? A Qualitative Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted Adams ◽  
Dana Sarnak ◽  
Joy Lewis ◽  
Jeff Convissar ◽  
Scott S. Young

Background. Patient-centered care is said to have a myriad of benefits; however, there is a lack of agreement on what exactly it consists of and how clinicians should deliver it for the benefit of their patients. In the context of maternity services and in particular for vulnerable women, we explored how clinicians describe patient-centered care and how the concept is understood in their practice. Methods. We undertook a qualitative study using interviews and a focus group, based on an interview guide developed from various patient surveys focused around the following questions: (i) How do clinicians describe patient-centered care? (ii) How does being patient-centered affect how care is delivered? (iii) Is this different for vulnerable populations? And if so, how? We sampled obstetricians and gynecologists, midwives, primary care physicians, and physician assistants from a health management organization and fee for service clinician providers from two states in the US covering insured and Medicaid populations. Results. Building a relationship between clinician and patient is central to what clinicians believe patient-centered care is. Providing individually appropriate care, engaging family members, transferring information from clinician to patient and from patient to clinician, and actively engaging with patients are also key concepts. However, vulnerable women did not benefit from patient-centered care without first having some of their nonmedical needs met by their clinician. Discussion. Most providers did not cite the core concepts of patient-centered care as defined by the Institute of Medicine and others.

2020 ◽  
Vol 158 (6) ◽  
pp. S-1357
Author(s):  
Jennifer Arney ◽  
Caroline P. Gray ◽  
Jack A. Clark ◽  
Aanand Naik ◽  
Donna L. Smith ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 22-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayalakshmi Jambunathan ◽  
Sharon Chappy ◽  
Jack (John) Siebers ◽  
Alishia Deda

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-101
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Troutman Adams, MA ◽  
Elisia L. Cohen, PhD ◽  
Andrew Bernard, MD ◽  
Whittney H. Darnell, PhD ◽  
Douglas R. Oyler, PharmD

Objective: The American health care system's adoption of the patient-centered care (PCC) model has transformed how medical providers communicate with patients about prescription pain medication. Concomitantly, the nation's opioid epidemic has necessitated a proactive response from the medical profession, requiring providers who frequently dispense opioids for acute pain to exercise vigilance in monitoring and limiting outpatient prescriptions. This qualitative study explores how surgical trainees balance PCC directives, including shared decision making, exchanging information with patients, and relationship maintenance, with opioid prescribing vigilance.Design: Investigators conducted interviews with 17 surgical residents and fellows (trainees) who routinely prescribe opioids at an academic medical center.Results: A qualitative descriptive analysis produced four codes, which were reduced to themes depicting problematic intersections between PCC imperatives and opioid vigilance during post-operative opioid-prescribing communication: (a) sharing the decision-making process contended with exerting medical authority, (b) reciprocating information contended with negotiating opioid prescribing terms with patients, (c) maintaining symbiotic relationships contended with prescribing ethics, and (d) achieving patient satisfaction contended with safeguarding opioid medications.Conclusion: Surgical training programs must supply trainees with post-surgical prescribing guidelines and communication skills training. Training should emphasize how PCC directives may work in tandem with--not in opposition to--opioid vigilance.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 72-72
Author(s):  
Nina S. Miller

72 Background: The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer established a patient-centered standard regarding the delivery of a survivorship care plan to cancer patients. In response to recommendations from the 2006 National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine report, From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, a working group developed a set of Continuum of Care standards to address the psychosocial needs of cancer patients. In 2009 Commission on Cancer members had met to discuss a strategic plan for addressing a major shift in accreditation standards from process to patient-centered care with a focus on patient outcomes. According to Cancer Program Standards: Ensuring Patient-Centered Care, the cancer program must implement a process to disseminate a comprehensive care summary and follow-up plan to patients with cancer who are completing cancer treatment. Programs are in full implementation mode and surveys monitoring this Survivorship Care Plan Standard have begun this year. The care plan provides guidance and recommendations for survivors and their healthcare providers to address the medical and psychosocial problems that may arise post-treatment. By delivering a plan, the patient is empowered with information about the treatment they have received, the recommendations for their care going forward, and recommended resources. Methods: Programs submit documentation to describe their process for delivery of care through an electronic activity report. Documentation of this standard includes method of delivery, identification of eligible patients, implementation process and tracking. This presentation will summarize program submissions for 2015-2016 and include an analysis of the details of the standard compliance as reported by accredited programs. Results: This analysis will include responses from all Commission on Cancer accredited programs reporting on this standard. The analysis will provide information about the trends in program implementation and compliance with the standard. Conclusions: This analysis will inform future decisions about the content of plans, the value of plan delivery to the provider and to the patient and summarize current practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadia Ahmed ◽  
Andrea Djurkovic ◽  
Kimberly Manalili ◽  
Balreen Sahota ◽  
Maria J. Santana

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e0126708 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheela Raja ◽  
Memoona Hasnain ◽  
Tracy Vadakumchery ◽  
Judy Hamad ◽  
Raveena Shah ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document