The application, character, and effectiveness of person-centred care with service-users, and the community within the discipline of podiatry: a scoping review.
Patient centred-approach
Patient-centred care
Person-centred approach
Person-centred care
Podiatry
Scoping review
Journal
Journal of foot and ankle research
ISSN: 1757-1146
Titre abrégé: J Foot Ankle Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101471610
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Aug 2022
19 Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
30
11
2021
accepted:
02
08
2022
entrez:
19
8
2022
pubmed:
20
8
2022
medline:
24
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The concept of person-centred care is embedded within healthcare policy, focusing on long-term conditions and multimorbidity. The evidence that person-centred care is being operationalised effectively across all areas of healthcare is limited. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the application, features, and effectiveness of person-centred care with service-users, carers, and the community within podiatry. The scoping review was based upon Arksey and Malley's five stage framework. The following databases were searched between January 2010 and March 2021: AMED, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane library, SocINDEX, British Education Index, Business Source Complete, MEDLINE (EBSCO), and the EThOS 'Global electronic thesis and dissertation' repository, Prospero, and reference lists of included papers. Primary research articles were included if they reported on a person-centred care focused intervention with podiatry. Research terms were developed, appropriate databases identified, and an initial search resulted in 622 papers which, following removal of duplicates and critical appraisal, resulted in 18 eligible papers. Data extracted involved the types of person-centred care utilised, intervention details, motivations for engaging in person-centred care interventions, and intervention barriers and challenges. Eighteen articles were included in the review. The main type of person-centred care utilised was patient/carer activities around self-management. None of the studies considered the role of the podiatrist as a person-centred care agent. The data on interventions generated the following themes 'service facilitated person-centred care' where a change has been made to service delivery, 'direct clinician delivery' where the intervention is delivered by the clinician with the patient present and 'patient instigated participation' where patient motivation is required to engage with an activity beyond the consultation. Outcome measures associated with quality of care and effectiveness were absent. There is a lack of congruency between the concept of person-centred care and how it is operationalised. A whole system approach that considers commissioning, organisational leadership, the role of the practitioners and patients has not been considered. There is immense scope for the podiatrist to play an important part in the personalised-care agenda, but currently research that can evidence the effectiveness of person-centred care in podiatry is absent. Open Science Framework ( osf.io/egjsd ).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The concept of person-centred care is embedded within healthcare policy, focusing on long-term conditions and multimorbidity. The evidence that person-centred care is being operationalised effectively across all areas of healthcare is limited. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the application, features, and effectiveness of person-centred care with service-users, carers, and the community within podiatry.
METHODS
METHODS
The scoping review was based upon Arksey and Malley's five stage framework. The following databases were searched between January 2010 and March 2021: AMED, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane library, SocINDEX, British Education Index, Business Source Complete, MEDLINE (EBSCO), and the EThOS 'Global electronic thesis and dissertation' repository, Prospero, and reference lists of included papers. Primary research articles were included if they reported on a person-centred care focused intervention with podiatry. Research terms were developed, appropriate databases identified, and an initial search resulted in 622 papers which, following removal of duplicates and critical appraisal, resulted in 18 eligible papers. Data extracted involved the types of person-centred care utilised, intervention details, motivations for engaging in person-centred care interventions, and intervention barriers and challenges.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Eighteen articles were included in the review. The main type of person-centred care utilised was patient/carer activities around self-management. None of the studies considered the role of the podiatrist as a person-centred care agent. The data on interventions generated the following themes 'service facilitated person-centred care' where a change has been made to service delivery, 'direct clinician delivery' where the intervention is delivered by the clinician with the patient present and 'patient instigated participation' where patient motivation is required to engage with an activity beyond the consultation. Outcome measures associated with quality of care and effectiveness were absent.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of congruency between the concept of person-centred care and how it is operationalised. A whole system approach that considers commissioning, organisational leadership, the role of the practitioners and patients has not been considered. There is immense scope for the podiatrist to play an important part in the personalised-care agenda, but currently research that can evidence the effectiveness of person-centred care in podiatry is absent.
REVIEW REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Open Science Framework ( osf.io/egjsd ).
Identifiants
pubmed: 35986405
doi: 10.1186/s13047-022-00566-z
pii: 10.1186/s13047-022-00566-z
pmc: PMC9389826
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
63Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Jan 10;18(1):5
pubmed: 29316881
Trials. 2016 May 17;17(1):251
pubmed: 27189190
Qual Health Res. 2002 Nov;12(9):1284-99
pubmed: 12448672
BMJ. 2011 Jun 16;342:d3411
pubmed: 21680622
Health Serv Res. 2019 Oct;54(5):1023-1035
pubmed: 31218671
Prim Care Diabetes. 2015 Apr;9(2):155-62
pubmed: 24929632
J Foot Ankle Res. 2019 Mar 18;12:17
pubmed: 30923577
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Mar;99(3):400-407
pubmed: 26547303
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2018 Mar;108(2):90-99
pubmed: 29111785
JMIR Diabetes. 2018 Oct 10;3(4):e10105
pubmed: 30305266
Lancet. 2018 Jul 7;392(10141):41-50
pubmed: 29961638
Foot Ankle Spec. 2015 Oct;8(5):406-12
pubmed: 25964290
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006 Aug;61(8):866-70
pubmed: 16912106
J Foot Ankle Res. 2018 Jun 04;11:26
pubmed: 29991966
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020 Jan;14(1):37-45
pubmed: 31122064
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016 Jan;32 Suppl 1:84-98
pubmed: 26340966
Int Wound J. 2020 Dec;17(6):1678-1686
pubmed: 32729231
J Foot Ankle Res. 2016 Jun 07;9:17
pubmed: 27274358
Aust J Prim Health. 2019 Nov;25(5):464-470
pubmed: 31186088
Health Expect. 2015 Dec;18(6):2616-28
pubmed: 25040882
J Foot Ankle Res. 2021 Jan 6;14(1):1
pubmed: 33407755
Diabetes Care. 2011 Apr;34(4):1041-6
pubmed: 21447666
BMJ. 2015 Feb 10;350:h181
pubmed: 25670186
Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
pubmed: 10940958
BMJ. 2014 Mar 07;348:g1687
pubmed: 24609605
Diabet Med. 2010 Feb;27(2):197-202
pubmed: 20546264
J Foot Ankle Res. 2018 Jun 08;11:29
pubmed: 29930710
Aust Health Rev. 2010 Mar;34(1):18-24
pubmed: 20334751
J Foot Ankle Res. 2021 Jan 13;14(1):6
pubmed: 33435997
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Foot (Edinb). 2019 Mar;38:54-60
pubmed: 30639800
Appl Nurs Res. 2020 Oct;55:151318
pubmed: 32586648
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Oct;99(10):1739-46
pubmed: 27217050