Health Care Analysis最新文献

All healthcare professionals (HCPs) have responsibilities to provide information to patients according to the duties found within UK decision-making guidance and with regards to theory about the doctor-patient relationship. While routinisation can be understood in a number of different ways, this paper is concerned with how routines might negatively affect patients in the decision-making process. Therefore, in this manuscript, medical decision making is understood as problematically routine when a medical test or procedure is framed as a standard one and-given the way options are presented-it is implied that someone can decide to use that test or treatment without being given sufficient opportunities to think through their choices. Routinisation, when understood in this way, can affect the quality and amount of information provided to patients and the ways in which patients reflect upon their choices when making decisions. With the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) into the UK healthcare system, bioethicists have questioned whether this new technology will be routinised and what the implications of routinisation on the decision-making process might be. While there have been numerous studies investigating the views and attitudes of pregnant women who use NIPT, there are fewer studies that look at the views and attitudes of healthcare professionals (HCPs). This study interviewed 20 UK-based HCPs who either offer NIPT or counselled pregnant women on the use of NIPT. One important finding was that many HCPs held the attitude that the NIPT decision-making process had become routine, however there was disagreement about whether routine NIPT was problematic or not. This study provides insights about the context that surrounds decision making for NIPT, and it raises important questions about how NIPT routinisation might be evaluated.

Approximately 70% of Koreans access health and medical information online. Health information providers play a crucial role in enhancing public health by ensuring that individuals can effectively consume and utilize this information according to their information-seeking behaviors. However, existing tools for evaluating health information websites have significant limitations. These tools are often one-size-fits-all and lack strategic recommendations for delivering consumer-centered health information. There is a clear need for alternative approaches beyond merely identifying the quality factors that satisfy consumers. A Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats-Analytic Hierarchy Process (SWOT-AHP) evaluates both internal and external environmental factors of a health information website, which provides strategies based on the prioritization and weighting of quality factors. Specifically, the 'National Health Information Portal,' a platform provided by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, was assessed through a comprehensive review of prior research and a SWOT analysis, followed by an AHP survey involving 15 experts specializing in health information websites. The findings of the analysis indicate that the most effective development strategy is the SO (Strengths-Opportunities) strategy. This study highlights the need to move beyond uniform evaluation tools and consider the dynamic and complex nature of the Internet, emphasizing the importance of developing prioritized strategies based on evaluations from both consumers and providers.

In many western countries informal care is conceived as the answer to the increasing care demand. Little is known how formal and informal caregivers collaborate in the context of an diverse ageing population. The aim of this study was to gain insight in how professionals' perspectives regarding the collaboration with informal carers with a migration background are framed and shaped by intersecting aspects of diversity. We used an intersectionality informed qualitative design with informal conversations (N = 12) and semi-structured interviews (N = 17) with healthcare professionals working with clients with Acquired Brain Injury. Two critical friends were involved in the analysis which was substantiated by a participatory analysis with a community of practice. We identified four interrelated themes: (a) 'The difficult Other' in which professionals reflected on carers with a migration background causing 'difficulties'; (b) 'The dependent Other' refers to professionals' realization that 'difficulties' are intensified by the context in which care takes place; (c) in 'The uncomfortable self' professionals describe how feelings of insecurities evoked by the Other are associated with an inability to act 'professionally', and; (d) 'The reflexive self' shows how some professionals reflect on their own identities and identify their blind spots in collaboration within a care network. These themes demonstrate the tensions, biases and power imbalances between carers and professionals, which may explain some of the existing health disparities perpetuated through care networks.

Research on mobile health (mHealth) applications has investigated how such technologies contribute to a responsibilisation of users/patients. This literature largely focuses on the individual responsibilities constructed by the apps and the neoliberal environments that enable the positioning of the user as responsible. With this focus, this scholarship is less attentive to the role of social relations in responsibilisation. In this article, I demonstrate how relational responsibilities are constructed in the communication of a North American self-testing app for "early changes in cognition". Through an analysis of qualitative expert interviews and images on the app's web presence, I show how social relations are, in fact, mobilised in the construction of the responsibilities to support the user in the test situation, to take the test for the sake of others, and to make others take the test. Based on this analysis, I argue that the role of social relations should receive more attention in the literature on responsibilisation, because they lead to additional, sometimes gendered responsibilities that a focus on individual responsibilities would miss.

Research on justifications has shown their significance in advice-giving, decision-making and children disputes. However, the majority of studies gloss over practical functions of justifications in patient-physician interactions as they are often expected and pursued by patients and in turn, are adopted by physicians to support their stance and authority. This study, through conversation analysis (CA), aims to explore a) what are pragmatic functions of justifications in patient-physician interaction? b) how and when do physicians unfold their justifications for treatment recommendations? c) how do physicians deal with different responses based on their epistemic and deontic domains?. A total of 32 video-recordings between postpartum women and physicians are collected and studied. Four pragmatic functions of justifications drawn upon by physicians are explored: justifications as face-saving, reassurance, risk discussion and clarification-seeking. Despite physicians' attempts to justify their positions as less challenged by patients, this is not the entire picture as they demonstrate their desire to resolve patients' concerns and coordinate their viewpoints to achieve the best practice that facilitates patients' well-being.

Environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change have adverse impacts on global health. Somewhat paradoxically, health care systems that aim to prevent and cure disease are themselves major emitters and polluters. In this paper we develop a justification for the claim that solidaristic health care systems should include sustainability as one of the criteria for determining which health interventions are made available or reimbursed - and which not. There is however a complication: most adverse health effects due to climate change do occur elsewhere in the world. If solidarity would commit us to take care of everyone's health, worldwide, it might imply that solidaristic health system cannot justifiably restrict universal access to their own national populations. In response we explain health solidarity is to be considered as a moral ideal. Such an ideal does not specify what societies owe to whom, but it does have moral implications. We argue that ignoring sustainability in political decision making about what health care is to be offered, would amount to betrayal of the ideal of solidarity.

Deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation was introduced in England in 2020, and is considered a vital part of the new UK NHS Blood and Transplant's 10-year strategy to increase consent for organ donation. Despite the legislation containing safeguards to protect the public, the introduction of deemed consent creates ethical, psychological and social un/certainties for healthcare professionals in their practice. In this paper, we offer insights into healthcare professionals' perspectives on deemed consent, drawn from interview data with 24 healthcare professionals in an NHS Trust in England, prior to the introduction of the legislation. Whilst participants supported deemed consent in principle, they were concerned that it would present a threat to the nature of donation as a 'gift'; the notion of informed consent (or non-consent); and the autonomy of donors, their relatives, and their own roles as health professionals, posing dilemmas for practice. We argue that healthcare professionals present themselves as guardians of potential (non)donors and thus as having ethics and integrity in their own practice. We draw conclusions around the values and principles that matter to healthcare professionals when contemplating consent in deceased donation which will be useful for organ donation committees and ethics forums.

Clinical decision-making in old-age care is a complex and ethically sensitive process. Despite its importance, research addressing the challenges of clinical decision-making in old-age care within this cultural context is limited. This study aimed to explore the challenges and ethical concerns in clinical decision-making in old-age care in Ethiopia. This qualitative study employed an inductive approach with data collected via semi-structured interviews with 20 older patients and 26 health professionals recruited from healthcare facilities in Ethiopia. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Our analysis identified three key themes. First, participants highlighted perceptions that older patients' religious beliefs interfere with the clinical decisions both older patients and health professionals make. Second, older patients often receive limited information from health professionals about their diagnosis and treatment. Third, families of older patients appear to strongly influence clinical decisions made by older patients or health professionals. This research enhances the understanding of clinical decision-making in old-age care within Ethiopia, a context where such research is scarce. As a result, this study contributes towards advancing the deliberation of ethical dilemmas that health professionals who work with older patients in Ethiopia might face. A key implication of the study is that there is a need for more ethics and cultural competence training for health professionals working with older patients in Ethiopia.

Based on a qualitative study, this paper explores how United States public health professionals view and think about the existing U.S. healthcare system, while also allowing these study participants to imagine new ways of structuring and practicing public health. Using semi-structured qualitative interviews, I show how public health professionals engage with the concept of "the social" and their personal experiences with public health to question the status quo. By giving public health professionals space in which to imagine changes and different ways of practicing public health, I demonstrate the effectiveness of imagination as a capacity that public health professionals possess to take the lead in creating the changes they hope for.

Anti-ageing medicines are products intended to extend lifespan and healthspan in humans that have a good potential use in public health policies. In the European Union, their development, production and consumption are dependent on regulatory science performed by the European Medicines Agency and its associated epistemic policies. They impose, among other things, an unfavourable burden of proof, a strict standard of proof and meta-methodological constrictions related to some theoretical issues. This results in a distribution of errors that tends to reduce false positives while increasing false negatives, leading to a set of social consequences that are generally accepted when the focus is placed on conventional medicines. However, when the same epistemic policies are applied to anti-ageing medicines, the distribution of errors is imbalanced, and undesirable outcomes like research discouragement and waiting time extensions appear. Three possible strategies that policymakers could implement to unblock the situation are presented for future reflection: the consideration of ageing as a disease, the application of methodological asymmetry and the use of biomarkers during clinical research.