Multimorbidity and person-centred care in a socioeconomically deprived community: a qualitative study.

IF 5.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2024.0286
Marianne McCallum, Sara Macdonald, Frances S Mair
{"title":"Multimorbidity and person-centred care in a socioeconomically deprived community: a qualitative study.","authors":"Marianne McCallum, Sara Macdonald, Frances S Mair","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2024.0286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People with multimorbidity (>2 long-term conditions) have poorer outcomes in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED). High-quality person-centred care (PCC) is important in those with multimorbidity, but socially vulnerable populations have not, to our knowledge, informed current PCC models.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore how wider community factors influence management of multimorbidity in the context of high SED, how high-quality PCC is defined by patients, and whether this influences healthcare management.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Ethnographically informed case study in a community experiencing high SED in Scotland.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participant observation (138 h) was undertaken within four community groups who also took part in two participatory workshops. There were 25 in-depth interviews with people with multimorbidity, recruited from local general practices; emerging findings were discussed with interviewees in one focus group. Field notes/transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Key aspects of PCC were 'patient as person', 'strong therapeutic relationship', 'coordination of care', and 'power sharing'; power sharing was particularly enabling but rarely happened (barriers often unseen by practitioners). Shared community experiences of 'being known', 'stigma', and 'none of the systems working' influenced how people approached health services and healthcare decisions. High-quality PCC may have been particularly effective in this setting because of its influence on ameliorating wider shared negative community experiences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In a high SED setting PCC is important and can enhance engagement. Wider community factors have a critical influence on engagement with health care in areas of high SED and PCC may be particularly important in this context because of its influence ameliorating these. Policymakers should prioritise and resource PCC.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0286","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People with multimorbidity (>2 long-term conditions) have poorer outcomes in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED). High-quality person-centred care (PCC) is important in those with multimorbidity, but socially vulnerable populations have not, to our knowledge, informed current PCC models.

Aim: To explore how wider community factors influence management of multimorbidity in the context of high SED, how high-quality PCC is defined by patients, and whether this influences healthcare management.

Design and setting: Ethnographically informed case study in a community experiencing high SED in Scotland.

Method: Participant observation (138 h) was undertaken within four community groups who also took part in two participatory workshops. There were 25 in-depth interviews with people with multimorbidity, recruited from local general practices; emerging findings were discussed with interviewees in one focus group. Field notes/transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Key aspects of PCC were 'patient as person', 'strong therapeutic relationship', 'coordination of care', and 'power sharing'; power sharing was particularly enabling but rarely happened (barriers often unseen by practitioners). Shared community experiences of 'being known', 'stigma', and 'none of the systems working' influenced how people approached health services and healthcare decisions. High-quality PCC may have been particularly effective in this setting because of its influence on ameliorating wider shared negative community experiences.

Conclusion: In a high SED setting PCC is important and can enhance engagement. Wider community factors have a critical influence on engagement with health care in areas of high SED and PCC may be particularly important in this context because of its influence ameliorating these. Policymakers should prioritise and resource PCC.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会经济贫困社区的多病症和以人为本的护理:一项定性研究。
背景:在社会经济贫困(SED)程度较高的地区,多病(>2 种长期病症)的治疗效果较差。高质量的以人为本的护理(PCC)对多病同治非常重要,但目前的以人为本的护理模式并未考虑到社会弱势群体。目的:探讨在社会经济贫困程度高的背景下,更广泛的社区因素如何影响多病同治的管理,患者如何定义高质量的以人为本的护理,以及这是否会影响医疗管理:设计与环境:对苏格兰高 SED 社区进行人种学案例研究:在 4 个社区团体中进行参与观察(小时数 = 142),这些团体还参加了 2 个参与式研讨会。对从当地全科诊所招募的多病症患者进行了 25 次深入访谈;在一个焦点小组中与受访者讨论了新发现。采用归纳式主题分析法对现场笔记/记录誊本进行分析:PCC 的关键方面是 "患者即个人"、"治疗关系"、"协调 "和 "权力共享";权力共享特别有利,但很少发生(从业人员往往看不到障碍)。被了解"、"耻辱 "和 "所有系统都不起作用 "等共同的社区经历影响着人们如何对待医疗服务和医疗决策。在这种情况下,高质量的儿童疾病防治中心可能特别有效,因为它可以改善更广泛的共同负面社区经验:在高 SED 环境中,PCC 非常重要,可以提高参与度。在 SED 高发地区,广泛的社区因素对参与医疗保健具有关键影响,而 PCC 在这种情况下可能尤为重要,因为它可以改善这些因素。政策制定者应优先考虑 PCC 并为其提供资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Lived experiences of end-of-life care at home in the UK: a scoping review of qualitative research. What helps or hinders the communication of poor prognosis between secondary and primary care? A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Relationship between research activity and the performance of English general practices: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study. Primary care experiences of adults reporting learning disability: a probability sample survey.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1