Person-centered and integrated care: a discussion of concepts

Introduction: Recently, there has been a paradigm shift in healthcare that calls for positioning patients as active partners in healthcare rather than passive recipients. This active partnership is even more evident with patients who live with multiple chronic diseases because with time, these patie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of integrated care 2019-08, Vol.19 (4), p.416
Hauptverfasser: Abdelhalim, Reham, Grudniewicz, Agnes, Kuluski, Kerry, Wodchis, Walter
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction: Recently, there has been a paradigm shift in healthcare that calls for positioning patients as active partners in healthcare rather than passive recipients. This active partnership is even more evident with patients who live with multiple chronic diseases because with time, these patients become experts in their own bodies, symptoms and management. Two concepts arose as a result of this shift; person-centered care (PCC) and integrated care (IC). Both concepts have been promoted as potential solutions to accommodate the needs of patients with multiple chronic diseases and they become increasingly evident in literature about these patients. However, both concepts have been described by authors as polymorphic and  ill-defined. Our study aims at understanding both concepts and revealing the connections between them in the context of patients living with multiple chronic diseases. Methods: We conducted a review of conceptual literature that looked at both PCC and IC, by searching Medline and CINAHL and consulting with experts. We applied a concept analysis approach using a combination of Walker & Avant and simultaneous concept analysis (SCA) to identify the unique characteristics of each concept and their relationships. Results: Through these methods, the antecedents, attributes, consequences and empirical referents of each concept were determined. Additionally, similarities and differences between the two concepts were identified and a definition offered for each concept. Furthermore, the interrelatedness between the key concepts was mapped, and definitions proposed. Our results will promote better understanding and communication about these concepts in practice and in research and policy contexts as well as to theory development by adding to previous research. Discussions: Although both concepts under study stem from the same philosophy of partnering with patients, PCC is a wider concept than IC. Integrated care is one way to achieve PCC but there are other approaches like co-production and redesigning the healthcare with the patients. True integrated care can barely be achieved if not rooted in a culture of PCC. This culture includes systems, organizations, providers, patients as well as their caregivers. In this sense, PCC may be better looked at as a philosophy rather than a quantifiable outcome. Conversely, IC can be measured directly through measurable indices of effectiveness, efficiency and patient experience. Conclusions: We conducted a
ISSN:1568-4156
1568-4156
DOI:10.5334/ijic.s3416