All together now – patient engagement, patient empowerment, and associated terms in personal healthcare

Hickmann, Emily; Richter, Peggy; Schlieter, Hannes

doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08501-5

Cited by 41 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(67 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients are enabled and expected to 'define their goals, take responsibility for their medical treatment and increase their autonomy' (Feste and Anderson 1995;cited in Varekamp et al 2009, p. 399). It has been argued that such 'patient participation' (WHO 1) leads to better health outcomes (Roberts 1999, p. 87;Lu et al 2018;McCarron et al 2021;Hickmann et al 2022). However, increased autonomy and setting goals do not mean that patients do everything by themselves: patient participation means that these shared activities are accompanied by healthcare professionals (Roberts 1999), within a facilitating environment.…”

Section: Health/ Patient Empowermentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Empowerment through health self-testing apps? Revisiting empowerment as a process

Kapeller

Loosman

2023

Med Health Care and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empowerment, an already central concept in public health, has gained additional relevance through the expansion of mobile health (mHealth). Especially direct-to-consumer self-testing app companies mobilise the term to advertise their products, which allow users to self-test for various medical conditions independent of healthcare professionals. This article first demonstrates the absence of empowerment conceptualisations in the context of self-testing apps by engaging with empowerment literature. It then contrasts the service these apps provide with two widely cited empowerment definitions by the WHO, which describe the term as a process that, broadly, leads to knowledge and control of health decisions. We conclude that self-testing apps can only partly empower their users, as they, we argue, do not provide the type of knowledge and control the WHO definitions describe. More importantly, we observe that this shortcoming stems from the fact that in the literature on mHealth and in self-testing marketing, empowerment is understood as a goal rather than a process. This characterises a shift in the meaning of empowerment in the context of self-testing and mHealth, one that reveals a lack of awareness for relational and contextual factors that contribute to empowerment. We argue that returning to a process-understanding of empowerment helps to identify these apps’ deficits, and we conclude the article by briefly suggesting several strategies to increase self-testing apps’ empowerment function.

show abstract

Section: Health/ Patient Empowermentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, our position problematises the idea that through the use of technology, empowerment is achievable without relying on healthcare professionals (e.g. Hickmann et al 2022).…”

Section: Statements and Declarationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empowerment through health self-testing apps? Revisiting empowerment as a process

Kapeller

Loosman

2023

Med Health Care and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Engaging patients in primary care means that patients should become partners in rather than solely recipients of care [ 7 , 9 , 19 , 20 ]. Healthcare professionals should be familiar with a patient’s personal circumstances by adopting an approach that is respectful, open and supportive, without separating illness from experiences, values, wishes, expectations, needs and activities [ 21 , 22 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting care engagement in primary care; the development of a maturity matrix

Wolters¹,

Mokadem

Wensing

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Care engagement or active patient involvement in healthcare contributes to the quality of primary care, but organisational preconditions in routine practice need to be aligned. A Maturity Matrix for Care Engagement to assess and discuss these preconditions in the general practice team was developed and tested on feasibility and acceptability in general practice. Methods and findings A systematic user-centred approach was applied, starting with a scoping literature search to describe the domains on the horizontal axis of the maturity matrix. The domains and growing steps (vertical axis) were refined by patients (n = 16) and general practice staff (n = 11) in three focus group discussions and reviewed by six experts (local facilitators and scientists). Seven domains could be distinguished: Personalised Care, Shared Decision Making, Self-Management, Patient as Partner, Supportive Means, Patient Environment, and Teamwork among Healthcare Professionals. The growing steps described three to six activities per domain (n = 32 in total) that contribute to care engagement. Local facilitators implemented the tool in two general practice teams according to a user guide, starting with a two-hour kick-off meeting on care engagement. In the next step, practitioners, nurses and assistants in each practice indicated their score on the domains individually. The scores were discussed in the facilitated practice meeting which was aimed at SMART improvement plans. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed in interviews showing that the tool was well received by the pilot practices, although the practice assistants had difficulties scoring some of the activities as they did not always relate to their daily work. An assessment after three months showed changes in practice organisation towards increased care engagement. Conclusions The maturity matrix on care engagement is a tool to identify the organisational practice maturity for care engagement. Suggested adaptations must be implemented before large-scale testing.

show abstract

“…Patient involvement is dictated by available opportunities and resources. Healthcare professionals must maximize the potential and opportunities for patient involvement, whereas patients have become essential for high-quality healthcare service provision [ 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How did healthcare professionals define patient engagement in quality management? A survey study

Saut

Berger

et al. 2023

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patient and family engagement (PFE) can positively impact the patient experience and care process outcomes. There is no unique type of PFE, and the process is usually defined by the quality management department or professionals responsible for this process in the hospital. The objective of this study is to define PFE in quality management based on the professional’s perspective. Method A survey was carried out with 90 professionals from Brazilian hospitals. There were two questions aimed at understanding the concept. The first was a multiple-choice question to identify synonyms. The second was an open-ended question to develop the definition. A content analysis methodology was employed by applying techniques for thematic and inferential analysis. Results Three words were classified as synonyms by more than 60% of respondents: involvement, participation, and centered care. The participants described patient participation at both the individual (related to the treatment) and organizational levels (related to quality improvement). The PFE in the treatment is related to the development, discussion and decision-making about the therapeutic plan, participation in each step of care, and knowledge of the institution's quality and safety processes. At the organizational level, engagement in quality improvement includes the involvement of the P/F in all processes of the institution, from strategic planning to the design or improvement processes, as well as active participation in institutional committees or commissions. Conclusion The professionals defined engagement in two levels (individual and organizational) and the results suggest that their point of view can influence the practice in the hospitals. Professionals of hospitals that implemented mechanisms of consult defined PFE more in the individual level. On the other hand, professionals of hospitals that implemented mechanisms of involvement considered PFE more focus in the organizational level.

show abstract

All together now – patient engagement, patient empowerment, and associated terms in personal healthcare

Cited by 41 publications

References 27 publications

Empowerment through health self-testing apps? Revisiting empowerment as a process

Empowerment through health self-testing apps? Revisiting empowerment as a process

Supporting care engagement in primary care; the development of a maturity matrix

How did healthcare professionals define patient engagement in quality management? A survey study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About