Search

AbstractPurposeMethodResultsConclusionsEthical erosion literature describes medical students’ patient centredness and empathy declines through their clinical years of training. Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships (LICs), an alternate clinical educational design, have been hypothesised to reduce ethical erosion. The authors aimed to measure change in medical students’ patient centredness and empathy at an institution with the largest LIC worldwide.Two whole LIC cohorts (LIC1 and LIC2) were invited to complete a questionnaire, which included patient centredness and empathy scales. Students completed the questionnaire at the start and end of each academic year. Block-rotation students (Non-LIC) were a comparator cohort. Complete cases data were analysed.22 Non-LIC, 66 LIC1 and 33 LIC2 students responded. Non-LIC students experienced a significant decline in empathy ([start] 113.14 vs. [end] 102.68, p<.001). Empathy did not significantly decline in the LIC cohorts. Patient centredness in LIC1 and LIC2 grew and reduced in the Non-LIC cohort, however, these changes were not statistically significant.This study supports the hypothesis LICs may reduce ethical erosion when compared to block-rotation placements. The results provide evidence that ethical erosion occurs in students who have completed block-rotation placements. This is the first study of UK-based medical students measuring empathy and patient centredness following completion of an LIC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study questionWhat outcomes should be reported in all studies investigating uterus-sparing interventions for treating uterine adenomyosis?Summary answerWe identified 24 specific and 26 generic core outcomes in nine domains.What is known alreadyResearch reporting adenomyosis treatment is not patient-centred and shows wide variation in outcome selection, definition, reporting and measurement of quality.Study design, size, durationAn international consensus development process was performed between March and December 2021. Participants in round one were 150 healthcare professionals, 17 researchers and 334 individuals or partners with lived experience of adenomyosis from 48 high-, middle- and low-income countries. There were 291 participants in the second round.Participants/materials, setting, methodsStakeholders included active researchers in the field, healthcare professionals involved in diagnosis and treatment, and people and their partners with lived experience of adenomyosis. The core component of the process was a 2-step modified Delphi electronic survey. The Steering Committee analysed the results and created the final core outcome set (COS) in a semi-structured meeting.Main results and the role of chanceA total of 241 outcomes was identified and distilled into a 'long list' of 71 potential outcomes. The final COS comprises 24 specific and 26 generic core outcomes across nine domains, including pain, uterine bleeding, reproductive outcomes, haematology, urinary system, life impact, delivery of care, adverse events and reporting items, all with definitions provided by the Steering Committee. Nineteen of these outcomes will apply only to certain study types. Although not included in the COS, the Steering Committee recommended that three health economic outcomes should be recorded.Limitations, reasons for cautionPatients from continents other than Europe were under-represented in this survey. A lack of translation of the survey might have limited the active participation of people in non-English speaking countries. Only 58% of participants returned to round two, but analysis did not indicate attrition bias. There is a significant lack of scientific evidence regarding which symptoms are caused by adenomyosis and when they are related to other co-existent disorders such as endometriosis. As future research provides more clarity, the appropriate review and revision of the COS will be necessary.Wider implications of the findingsImplementing this COS in future studies on the treatment of adenomyosis will improve the quality of reporting and aid evidence synthesis.Study funding/competing interest(s)No specific funding was received for this work. T.T. received a grant (grant number 2020083) from the South Eastern Norwegian Health Authority during the course of this work. T.T. receives personal fees from General Electrics and Medtronic for lectures on ultrasound. E.R.L. is the chairman of the Norwegian Endometriosis Association. M.G.M. is a consultant for Abbvie Inc and Myovant, receives research funding from AbbVie and is Chair of the Women's Health Research Collaborative. S.-W.G. is a board member of the Asian Society of Endometriosis and Adenomyosis, on the scientific advisory board of the endometriosis foundation of America, previous congress chair for the World Endometriosis Society, for none of which he received personal fees. E.S. received outside of this work grants for two multicentre trials on endometriosis from the National Institute for Health Research UK, the Rosetrees Trust, and the Barts and the London Charity, he is a member of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), Medicines for Women's Health Expert Advisory Group, he is an ambassador for the World Endometriosis Society, and he received personal fees for lectures from Hologic, Olympus, Medtronic, Johnson & Johnson, Intuitive and Karl Storz. M.H. is member of the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy subcommittee. No other conflict of interest was declared.Trial registration numberN/A.

Objectives: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) can be used for the improvement of quality of care. In this study, the outcome of an open-ended question PREM combined with computer-assisted analysis is compared to the outcome of a closed-ended PREM questionnaire. Methods: This survey study assessed the outcome of the open-ended questionnaire PREM and a close-ended question PREM of patients with unilateral vestibular schwannoma in a tertiary vestibular schwannoma expert centre. Results: The open-ended questions PREM, consisting of five questions, was completed by 507 participants and resulted in 1508 positive and 171 negative comments, categorised into 27 clusters. The close-ended questions PREM results were mainly positive (overall experience graded as 8/10), but did not identify specific action points. Patients who gave high overall scores (>8) on the close-ended question provided points for improvement in the open-ended question PREM, which would have been missed using the close-ended questions only. Conclusions: Compared to the close-ended question PREM, the open-ended question PREM provides more detailed and specific information about the patient experience in the vestibular schwannoma care pathway. Innovation: Automated analysis of feedback with the open-ended question PREM revealed relevant insights and identified topics for targeted quality improvement, whereas the close-ended PREM did not.

Copyright of Journal of Health Academics / Sağlık Akademisyenleri Dergisi is the property of Journal of Health Academics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Healthcare staff are encouraged to use feedback from their patients to inform service and quality improvement. Receiving patient feedback via online channels is a relatively new phenomenon that has rarely been conceptualised. Further, the implications of a wide, varied and unknown(able) audience being able to view and interact with online patient feedback are yet to be understood. We applied a theoretical lens of dramaturgy to a large ethnographic dataset, collected across three NHS Trusts during 2019/2020. We found that organisations demonstrated varying levels of 'preparedness to perform' online, from invisibility through to engaging in public conversation with patients within a wider mission for transparency. Restrictive 'cast lists' of staff able to respond to patients was the hallmark of one organisation, whereas another devolved responding responsibility amongst a wide array of multidisciplinary staff. The visibility of patient‐staff interactions had the potential to be culturally disruptive, dichotomously invoking either apprehensions of reputational threat or providing windows of opportunity. We surmise that a transparent and conversational feedback response frontstage aligns with the ability to better prioritise backstage improvement. Legitimising the autonomous frontstage activity of diverse staff groups may help shift organisational culture, and gradually ripple outwards a shared responsibility for transparent improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the complicated and often-contradictory notions of choice at play in complex care management (CCM) programmes in the US healthcare safety net. Drawing from longitudinal data collected over two years of ethnographic fieldwork at urban safety-net clinics, our study examines the CCM goal of transforming frequent emergency department (ED) utilisers into 'active' patients who will reduce their service utilisation and thereby contribute to a more rational, cost-effective healthcare system. By considering our data alongside philosopher Annemarie Mol's (2008) conceptualisation of the competing logics of choice and care, we argue that these premises often undermine CCM teams' efforts to support patients and provide the care they need - not only to prevent medical crises, but to overcome socio-economic barriers as well. We assert that while safety-net CCM programmes are held accountable for the degree to which their patients successfully transform into self-managing, cost-effective actors, much of the care CCM staff provide in fact involves attempts to intervene on structural obstacles that impinge on patient choice. CCM programmes thus struggle between an economic imperative to get patients to make better health choices and a moral imperative to provide care in the face of systemic societal neglect. (A virtual abstract of this paper can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_979cmCmR9rLrKuD7z0ycA).

Objective: To validate and refine typologies of consultation performance from previous research to identify learning needs associated with each typology.Methods: We performed a qualitative study in a General Practice Specialty Training programme, using a two-stage design. First, we selected four exemplars from 80 videotaped consultations of 7 first-year and 6 third-year trainees that reflected the four typologies. We subsequently held individual interviews with clinical supervisors (N = 20) who observed these consultations to identify recurrent trainee behaviours.Results: The 'doctor-patient interaction' dimension from previous research was specified to encompass relationship-building, exploring, structuring, and shared decision-making competencies. Medical expertise was a moderating factor. The attitude and consultation behaviours included in the typologies were validated and we formulated directions for learning based on learning needs identified per typology.Conclusion: Supervisors have a shared frame of reference for the behaviours reflecting proficient consultation performance. Serving as a developmental road map, all learning needs emphasised contextual adaptation, calling for an improved balance between patient-centred relationship building and application of medical expertise.Practice Implications: By providing rich and tailored feedback on consultation performance, the refined typologies - albeit subject to additional refinement in future research - may promote the monitoring of individual competence development over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A patient-centred attitude is important for a successful physician-patient relationship. Understanding the evolving trend in patient centredness (PC) among budding doctors and the underlying etiological factors thereof, would help in the institution of suitable measures for fostering PC during the course of their training. This letter is a brief commentary on the interesting article by Ardenghi S, et al. regarding "Medical students' attitude toward patient-centeredness" from the lens of a medical student from India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bringing therapeutic innovation and the latest science to routine patient care, while safeguarding principles of affordability and equality, is a challenging mission in the current complex multi‐stakeholder environment. Precision oncology and new approaches to clinical trials (methods and clinical setting) have dramatically changed clinical research and the clinical development of new treatments. Improved understanding of molecular biology and immunology paves the way for innovative pharmacological approaches. However, we argue that the evidence generated during the clinical development of these new products for the purpose of obtaining marketing authorisations often does not address fundamental questions concerning the impact of these new interventions on the most relevant clinical outcomes: namely, quality of life and patient survival. Similarly, patient populations (for example defined by biomarkers), treatment duration, and sequence and combination of treatments within current treatment pathways are often poorly defined by clinical developments for regulatory purposes. Finally, the lack of integrated translational research within the pathway of development is a major limiting factor to delivering cost‐effective and affordable, evidence‐based care to clinical practice. This leaves many gaps in the knowledge on the efficacy and therapeutic use of medicines, which can impose a significant financial burden on healthcare systems, possibly to the detriment of more cost‐effective interventions. We argue that policy changes are required to integrate clinical research and healthcare to inform clinical practice. New routes toward optimising the integration of drug development and care are being proposed to achieve this ultimate goal.

The literature on HIV therapeutics research is rife with terminology associating ‘sterilisation’ with HIV cure. We find connotations of the word ‘sterilising’ problematic for the HIV cure research field. In this viewpoint, we review associations of sterilising with concepts of disinfection or cleansing, as well as coerced sterilisation. We discuss emerging findings from socio-behavioural research that show aversion from people living with HIV towards the ‘sterilising cure’ nomenclature. We call for more collaborations with people with HIV as partners to help define what would be a more acceptable terminology for describing an HIV cure.

Introduction: Regular physical activity (PA) is recommended by all type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management guidelines. The OPADIA study aimed to determine whether using a specific patient questionnaire (Optima-PA©) could help T2DM patients increase their PA by leading to better physician-patient communication and improved levels of shared decision making concerning Specific, Measurable, Acceptable, Realistic, Timely (SMART)-PA micro-objectives.Methods: Physicians participating in this multicentre, prospective, randomised, real-life study were allocated to a standard group (T2DM patients managed according to usual clinical practice, n = 24) or the OPTIMA-PA group (additional use of the questionnaire, n = 30). The main outcome was the percentage of inclusion visits ending with the setting up of at least one SMART-PA micro-objective. Other outcomes were the impact of the OPTIMA-PA questionnaire on patient perceptions of shared decision making (ENTRED questionnaire) and the impact of the OPTIMA-PA questionnaire and establishing SMART-PA micro-objectives as well as patient-perceived physician empathy (ENTRED questionnaire) and GP aptitude for patient-centredness (SEPCQ scores) on patient PA levels over a 3-month period (IPAQ-SF scores).Results: One hundred twenty-two patients were included in the standard group and 134 in the OPTIMA-PA group. Unexpectedly, more inclusion visits ended with SMART-PA micro-objectives being set up in the standard group (p < 0.001): 81.1% (n = 99/122) versus 59.7% (n = 80/134). However, fewer patients in the OPTIMA-PA group felt that GPs made decisions alone (32% versus 60%; p < 0.0001). Positive correlations were also observed between GP patient-centredness and patient-perceived GP empathy or increased patient PA over the study period.Conclusion: Although the OPTIMA-PA questionnaire did not directly promote setting up of SMART-PA micro-objectives in T2DM patients, the OPADIA study demonstrated that this tool was effective at improving patient-physician relationships by increasing patient involvement in therapeutic decision making. Our study also highlighted the importance of GP aptitude for patient-centredness for improving PA in T2DM patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is no consensus among health professionals on how to structure medical records to serve clinical decision-making. Three approaches co-exist (source-oriented, problem-oriented, goal-oriented), each suiting a different subset of patients. In primary care, the problem-oriented approach is dominant, but for patients with multiple conditions (multimorbidity) the goal-oriented approach seems more appropriate. There is a need to combine different approaches in one medical-record system. In this article, we explain some misconceptions about ‘problems’ and ‘goals’ that hinder the way to consensus. When putting the approaches into historical perspective, it becomes evident that each relates to a different definition of health. Each approach has its specific merits that should be preserved even when health definitions change. Hence, we combine the merits of each approach into one overarching model, as to show the way to a new generation of electronic medical-record systems that can serve all patients. This model has three levels: a level of problems, diseases, and patient goals, a level of (shared) objectives, and a level of action plans and results.

Introduction: This study investigated the self-reported take-home messages of medical students after an early training module in breaking bad news (BBN). The findings will aid the discussion on how to teach BBN. Methods: We asked 592 second year medical students at two Dutch medical schools to write down what they had learned, right after their first communication skills training in BBN. We analysed these self-reported take-home messages using a hybrid form of qualitative content analysis using SPIKES as a conceptual frame. Results: The most important take-home messages reported by students in both schools were: how to inform the patient (24,5%), how to deal with emotions (20,6%), and how to prepare for a BBN-consultation (16,9%). Additionally, students reported the professional quality "being patient-centered". Conclusions: Early communication skills training on BBN, including true stories and examples of doctors and their BBN-experiences, does not only give the students the knowledge how to break bad news to patients, but also which underlying professional qualities are needed to successfully break bad news. Good role models and realistic examples are therefore important. We propose a new mnemonic PRINSE (PReparation-INformation-Silence-Emotions) for novice learners in the design of a helical curriculum.

In the face of warnings about total institutions and growing concern about the quality of care, healthcare professionals in Western Europe and North America have increasingly been exhorted to tailor their services to individuals in their care. In this article, we invite our readers to become more interested in the kinds of differences care is being tailored to, and with what effects. Focusing on food provision for residents with dementia, we present three repertoires through which care workers attend to, and enact different sets of differences between individuals: providing choice allows residents to express fleeting preferences; knowing residents places emphasis on care providers' familiarity with a person; and catering to identities brings to the fore the tastes which make up part of who someone is. The analysis brings attending to difference to the fore as a practical process and suggests that tailoring care requires sensitivity to the different kinds of individuals enacted when attending to difference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bringing therapeutic innovation and the latest science to routine patient care, while safeguarding principles of affordability and equality, is a challenging mission in the current complex multi‐stakeholder environment. Precision oncology and new approaches to clinical trials (methods and clinical setting) have dramatically changed clinical research and the clinical development of new treatments. Improved understanding of molecular biology and immunology paves the way for innovative pharmacological approaches. However, we argue that the evidence generated during the clinical development of these new products for the purpose of obtaining marketing authorisations often does not address fundamental questions concerning the impact of these new interventions on the most relevant clinical outcomes: namely, quality of life and patient survival. Similarly, patient populations (for example defined by biomarkers), treatment duration, and sequence and combination of treatments within current treatment pathways are often poorly defined by clinical developments for regulatory purposes. Finally, the lack of integrated translational research within the pathway of development is a major limiting factor to delivering cost‐effective and affordable, evidence‐based care to clinical practice. This leaves many gaps in the knowledge on the efficacy and therapeutic use of medicines, which can impose a significant financial burden on healthcare systems, possibly to the detriment of more cost‐effective interventions. We argue that policy changes are required to integrate clinical research and healthcare to inform clinical practice. New routes toward optimising the integration of drug development and care are being proposed to achieve this ultimate goal. Fundamental questions addressing clinically relevant outcomes (survival, quality of life) are often not addressed during drug development. Poorly informative datasets on effectiveness and optimal use of treatments are not in the best interests of patients and contribute to undue expenditures. Policy changes are needed to integrate informative, conflict‐of‐interest‐free, applied, translational and clinical research in healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oyvind Bjertnaes, Hilde Hestad Iversen, Andrew M Garratt Unit for Patient-Reported Quality, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway Purpose: Surveys of patients’ experiences typically show results that are indicative of positive experiences. Unbalanced response scales have reduced positive skew for responses to items within the Universal Patient Centeredness Questionnaire (UPC-Q). The objective of this study was to compare the unbalanced response scale with another unbalanced approach to scaling to assess whether the positive skew might be further reduced. Patients and methods: The UPC-Q was included in a patient experience survey conducted at the ward level at six hospitals in Norway in 2015. The postal survey included two reminders to nonrespondents. For patients in the first month of inclusion, UPC-Q items had standard scaling: poor, fairly good, good, very good, and excellent. For patients in the second month, the scaling was more positive: poor, good, very good, exceptionally good, and excellent. The effect of scaling on UPC-Q scores was tested with independent samples t-tests and multilevel linear regression analysis, the latter controlling for the hierarchical structure of data and known predictors of patient-reported experiences. Results: The response rate was 54.6% (n=4,970). Significantly lower scores were found for all items of the more positively worded scale: UPC-Q total score difference was 7.9 (P

Oyvind Bjertnaes, Hilde Hestad Iversen, Olaf Holmboe, Kirsten Danielsen, Andrew GarrattUnit for Patient-Reported Quality, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway Background: This study developed and tested the reliability and validity of the Universal Patient Centeredness Questionnaire (UPC-Q). Methods: The UPC-Q developed in this study has three parts: 1) the aspects that patients consider the most important when receiving a relevant health care service, rating the health care services on these aspects and their prioritization, 2) the overall experiences of patients using the relevant health care service, and 3) suggestions for improvements. The UPC-Q was tested in four different patient-experience surveys in 2015, including psychiatric inpatients (n=109), general practitioner (GP) patients (n=1,059), and inpatients from two hospital samples (n=973, n=599). The UPC-Q was tested for item completeness and ceiling effects, while the UPC-Q scale consisting of the first part of the UPC-Q was tested for internal consistency reliability and construct validity. Results: The percentage of patients rating at least one aspect was 70.6% for psychiatric inpatients, 77.6% for hospital inpatients, and 90.6% for GP patients, while 88.9% of the psychiatric inpatients, 93.1% of the hospital inpatients, and 95.3% of the GP patients were able to prioritize the aspects. The internal consistency reliability of the UPC-Q scale was acceptable in all samples (Cronbach’s alpha >0.7), and construct validity was supported by 20 of 21 significant associations between the UPC-Q and related variables. The UPC-Q total score was skewed toward positive evaluations, but the ceiling effect was smaller for an unbalanced response scale than for a balanced scale. Conclusion: The UPC-Q includes ratings of what is most important for individual patients, while at the same time providing data for improving the quality of health care and making it possible to monitor trends within and across patient populations. This study included psychiatric inpatients, hospital inpatients, and GP patients, and found that the UPC-Q performed well in terms of acceptance, internal consistency reliability, and construct validity. Keywords: patient centeredness, patient satisfaction, questionnaire, survey

Aim: To create sustained improvements in medical students’ critical thinking skills through short teaching interventions in pharmacology. Method: The ability to make professional decisions was assessed by providing year-4 medical students at a UK medical school with a novel medical scenario (antenatal pertussis vaccination). Forty-seven students in the 2012 cohort acted as a pretest group, answering a questionnaire on this novel scenario. To improve professional decision-making skills, 48 students from the 2013 cohort were introduced to three commonly used medications, through tutor-led 40-min teaching interventions, among six small groups using a structured presentation of evidence-based medicine and ethical considerations. Student members then volunteered to peer-teach on a further three medications. After a gap of 8 weeks, this cohort (post-test group) was assessed for professional decision-making skills using the pretest questionnaire, and differences in the 2-year groups analysed. Results: Students enjoyed presenting on medications to their peers but had difficulty interpreting studies and discussing ethical dimensions; this was improved by contextualising information via patient scenarios. After 8 weeks, most students did not show enhanced clinical curiosity, a desire to understand evidence, or ethical questioning when presented with a novel medical scenario compared to the previous year group who had not had the intervention. Students expressed a high degree of trust in guidelines and expert tutors and felt that responsibility for their own actions lay with these bodies. Conclusion: Short teaching interventions in pharmacology did not lead to sustained improvements in their critical thinking skills in enhancing professional practice. It appears that students require earlier and more frequent exposure to these skills in their medical training.

Background Patient centred communication can improve pharmaceutical care, but is not well described for pharmacists. Aim of the review To provide a comprehensive and accessible overview of the concept of patient centred communication for the pharmacy practice. Method A scoping review and thematic analysis was undertaken to synthesize the extracted data and present it in a model. Results Literature search and selection resulted in eighteen articles. Thematic analysis of the extracted data led to five categories regarding patient centred communication. Two categories refer to phases of a pharmaceutical consultation: (1) shared problem defining and (2) shared decision making; three refer to underlying concepts and assumptions about patient centredness regarding (3) the patient, (4) the pharmacist and (5) the therapeutic relation. The categories were modelled in the so called Utrecht's Model for Patient centred communication in the Pharmacy. Conclusion Although there might be barriers to implement patient centred communication in the pharmacy, the concept of patient centred communication as described in the literature is relevant for the pharmacy practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two Universities from Oulu, Finland organised integrated and interprofessional (IP) type 2 diabetes training periods for undergraduate medical and nursing students in collaboration with the University Hospital and Health and Wellbeing Centre of Oulu. There is an ongoing health, social services and regional government reform in Finland. The services will be organised in a customer-orientated way and the reform will combine the primary and secondary services. The training was tailored to reflect the real life future setting in Finnish primary care, and this model fits well with the principles of collaborative education. The study aimed at investigating students’ attitudes and readiness for inter professional learning and their learning experience in combined primary and secondary care settings. The second aim was to strengthen students’ professional skills by working with patients in a patient-centred manner. The “Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale” was used with added questions about pair training. Students’ perceptions of their clinical skills were evaluated. The students valued the mutual learning experience in outpatient primary care. They felt comfortable with working together and complemented each other. Students performed well with IP competencies such as patient centredness, communication and team functioning. Patients in general were very satisfied with the visit. Teamwork and collaboration, professional identity and pair work were highly scored in both student groups while roles and responsibilities were evaluated a little less positively. Collaboration between different levels of care and health policies is important when developing health professionals’ education. This IP teamwork experience helps both future and current health-care professionals to better organise the care of chronic illnesses.

Diversity has become a buzzword in medical care, denoting a re-evaluation of what it means to attend to differences among human bodies and lives. Questions about what types of differences matter and how they should be defined have become important normative and analytical challenges. Drawing on two case studies, we show how differences between patients and patient-collectives are not simply waiting to be recognised and addressed but also enacted within situated healthcare practices. Although concerns with diversity are present in both cases, they take different forms. In a Viennese health-promotion project for obese clients, care practices are both based on and reproduce large-scale categories that divide the population into distinct subgroups with specific needs. Conversely, in an outpatient clinic for bariatric surgery patients, a technical fix-oriented procedure leads to concerns over diversity becoming an add-on realised by tending to each patient's idiosyncrasies and personal stories. By tracing the practices of diversity and the tensions they produce, we show how classifications and understandings of human difference are based on infrastructures that enable and constrain them. Furthermore, we discuss how they become consequential in healthcare, thereby indicating the importance of remaining reflexive about the political implications of diversity discourse and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to classify and describe the purpose of ward rounds, who attends each round and their role, and participants' perception of each other's role during the respective ward rounds. Design/methodology/approach - A literature review of face-to-face ward rounds in medical wards was conducted. Peer reviewed journals and government publications published between 2000 and 2014 were searched. Articles were classified according to the type of round described in the study. Purposes were identified using keywords in the description of why the round was carried out. Descriptions of tasks and interactions with team members defined participant roles. Findings - Eight round classifications were identified. The most common were the generalised ward; multidisciplinary; and consultant rounds. Multidisciplinary rounds were the most collaborative round. Medical officers were the most likely discipline to attend any round. There was limited reference to allied health clinicians and patient involvement on rounds. Perceptions attendees held of each other reiterated the need to continue to investigate teamwork. Practical implications - A collaborative approach to care planning can occur by ensuring clinicians and patients are aware of different ward round processes and their role in them. Originality/value - Analysis fulfils a gap in the literature by identifying and analysing the different ward rounds being undertaken in acute medical wards. It identifies the complexities in the long established routine hospital processes of the ward round. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims Quality of care (QoC) has gained increased attention in IBD. A better QoC has, historically, been linked to improved treatment outcomes. Even so, factors of equal importance to patients may be quality of life (QoL), patient–physician communication and access to care. Recent surveys suggest that IBD care in Europe is suboptimal. Methods Patients were recruited from nine hospitals in the south-eastern and western part of Norway as a part of an observational, multicenter study In addition to clinical and socio-demographic factors; a purposely designed 26 item questionnaire was used to quantify aspects related to IBD care, including QoC. Moreover, the Fatigue Questionnaire (FQ) was used to investigate fatigue. Results In total, 411 patients were included. Of these, 231 were diagnosed with CD and 180 with UC. Furthermore, 86.1% (354/411) were satisfied with the quality of IBD follow-up and only 4.1% (17/411) were dissatisfied. Most dissatisfaction was related to: lack of focus on personal relations (18.2%), HRQoL (15.1%), general practitioner knowledge of IBD (13.9%), ability to talk about important topics (7.8%), and hospital discharge communication (9.4%). Higher age and longer disease duration was associated with improved QoC scores in both UC and CD. Fatigue was associated with decreased QoC scores in both diagnoses. Conclusions Patients are satisfied with quality of care in IBD. However, communication seems to be an important area of improvement – not only related to patient–physician communication, but also to transitional communication between different health-care levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Health care providers seek to improve patient-centred care. Due to fragmentation of services, this can only be achieved by establishing integrated care partnerships. The challenge is both to control costs while enhancing the quality of care and to coordinate this process in a setting with many organisations involved. The problem is to establish control mechanisms, which ensure sufficiently consideration of patient centredness. Theory and methods: Seventeen qualitative interviews have been conducted in hospitals of metropolitan areas in northern Germany. The documentary method, embedded into a systems theoretical framework, was used to describe and analyse the data and to provide an insight into the specific perception of organisational behaviour in integrated care. Results: The findings suggest that integrated care partnerships rely on networks based on professional autonomy in the context of reliability. The relationships of network partners are heavily based on informality. This correlates with a systems theoretical conception of organisations, which are assumed autonomous in their decision-making. Conclusion and discussion: Networks based on formal contracts may restrict professional autonomy and competition. Contractual bindings that suppress the competitive environment have negative consequences for patient-centred care. Drawbacks remain due to missing self-regulation of the network. To conclude, less regimentation of integrated care partnerships is recommended.