Group medical visits can deliver on patient-centred care objectives: results from a qualitative study
Josée G Lavoie, Sabrina T Wong, Meck Chongo, Annette J Browne, Martha L P MacLeod, Cathy Ulrich, Josée G Lavoie, Sabrina T Wong, Meck Chongo, Annette J Browne, Martha L P MacLeod, Cathy Ulrich
Abstract
Background: Patient-centred care emerged in the late 1960s as a framework to guide providers and decision-makers towards the provision of more effective health care and better outcomes. An important body of literature has since emerged, reporting mixed results in terms of outcomes. To date, assessments of the effectiveness of patient-centred approaches have focused one-on-one consultations. The purpose of this article is to explore dimensions identified as key in the patient-centred literature in the context of primary health care services delivered in a group setting. Group Medical Visits (GMVs) offer a novel format for the delivery of patient-centred primary health care services, especially for patients living with complex morbidities.
Methods: Drawing on a large study of GMVs, we report on key format and process-oriented elements identified in GMVs, and on their link to improved outcomes. For the purpose of this study, we interviewed 34 providers and 29 patients who have been engaged in GMVs, delivered in rural, northern and First Nation communities in British Columbia, Canada.
Results: Our analysis shows that the delivery of PHC in a group format results in a shift in the role of the provider, from that of an adjudicator involved in imparting norms of self-care, to that of a facilitator who assists the group in defining norms of self-care that are based on medical knowledge but also on the broader context of patients' lived experience and on their pragmatic experience. In a group process, peer-patients take on the role of promoting these norms to other patients. This results in a significant shift in the role of the provider, increased trust, increased knowledge for the providers and the patients and better patient self-management. Our results also show increase satisfaction for patients and providers.
Conclusions: GMVs offer an alternative format for the provision of PHC that brings together the benefit of a group process and of a clinical encounter. This format can successfully deliver on the promises of patient-centred care.
References
- Parsons T. The social system. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe; 1951.
- Byrne PS, Long BE. Doctors talking to patients. London: HMSO; 1976.
- Seppala G. Clinical. Consolidated Health Informatics Initiative: Encounters; 2003.
- Roter D. The enduring and evolving nature of the patient-physician relationship. Patient Educ Counsel. 2000;39:5–15. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00086-5.
- Goodyear-Smith F, Buetow S. Power issues in the doctor-patient relationship. Health Care Anal. 2001;9:449–462. doi: 10.1023/A:1013812802937.
- Boyer CA, Lutfey KE. Examining critical health policy issues within and beyond the clinical encounter: patient-provider relationships and help-seeking behaviors. J Health Soc Behav. 2010;51:S80–S93. doi: 10.1177/0022146510383489.
- Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centred consultations and outcomes in primary care: a review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;48:51–61. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00099-X.
- Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med. 2000;51:1087–1110. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00098-8.
- Barlow JK, Reading C: "Relational Care" - A Guide to Health Care and Support for Aboriginal People Living with HIV/AIDS. Ottawa. AIDS Network (CAAN): Canadian Aboriginal; 2008.
- Moral agency. Relational connections and support. In: Storch J, Rodney P, Starzomski R, editor. Toward a moral horizon: Nursing ethics for leadership and practice. 2. Toronto: Pearson Canada Inc; 2013. pp. 160–187.
- Felton A, Stickley T. Pedagogy, power and service user involvement. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2004;11:89–98. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2004.00693.x.
- Frankel RM, Stein TS. Getting the most out of the clinical encounter: the four habits model. J Med Pract Manag. 2001;16:184–191.
- McLeod C, Sherwin S. In: Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self. Mackenzie C, Stoljar N, editor. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000. Relational autonomy, self-trust, and health care for patients who are oppressed; pp. 259–269.
- Sherwin S. In: Health Care Ethics in Canada. Baylis F, Downie J, Hoffmaster B, Sherwin S, editor. Toronto: Nelson; 2004. A relational approach to autonomy in health care.
- Pilnick A, Dingwall R. On the remarkable persistence of asymmetry in doctor/patient interaction: a critical review. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72:1374–1382. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.02.033.
- Lewin SA, Skea ZC, Entwistle V, Zwarenstein M, Dick J. Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001. CD003267.
- Noffsinger EB. Running Group Visits in Your Practice. New York, NY: Springer; 2009.
- McLeod L. Multitask in the exam room: three shared appointment models help physicians see more patients. Private Practice Success. 2004;6:2–8.
- Edelman D, McDuffie JR, Oddone E, Gierisch JM, Williams JW. Shared medical appointments for chronic medical conditions: a systematic review. VA-ESP Project #09-010. Durham, NC: Evidence-based Synthesis Program Center; 2012.
- Jaber R, Braksmajer A, Trilling JS. Group visits: a qualitative review of current research. JABFM. 2006;19:276–290. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.19.3.276.
- Kurtz LF. Self-help and support groups: a handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks: Sage Sourcebooks for the Human Services; 1997.
- Carlsson ME, Strang PM, Nygren U. Qualitative analysis of the questions raised by patients with gynecologic cancers and their relatives in an educational support group. J Cancer Educ. 1999;14:41–46.
- Solomon P. Peer support/consumer provided services underlying processes, benefits, and critical ingredients. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2004;7:392–401.
- Wood SA. The analysis of an innovative HIV-positive women's support group. Social Work with Groups. 2007;30:9–28. doi: 10.1300/J009v30n03_02.
- Surowiecki J. The Wisdom of Crowds. Why the many are smarter than the few. London: Abacus; 2004.
- Campbell J. In: On our own, together: Peer programs for people with mental illness. Clay S, editor. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press; 2005. The historical and philosophical development of peer-run support programs; pp. 17–66.
- Mead S, MacNeil C. Peer support: what makes it unique? Int J Psychosoc Rehabil. 2006;10:29–37.
- MacNealy MS. Strategies for empirical research in writing. New York: Addison Wesley Longman; 1999.
- Higginbottom GMA. Sampling issues in qualitative research. Nurse Res. 2004;12:7–19.
- Thorne S, Kirkham SR, O'Flynn-Magee K. The analytic challenge in interpretive description. Int J Qual Meth. 2004;3:1–11.
- Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1985.
- Shaw A. Warwick Medical School. Coventry: Warwick Medical School; 2006. Models for Interpreting/Advocacy Provision.
- Lupton D. Perspectives on power, communication and the medical encounter: implications for nursing theory and practice. Nurs Inq. 1995;2:157–163. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.1995.tb00166.x.
- May C. A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:1–11. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-1.
- Thom DH, Campbell B. Patient-physician trust: an exploratory study. J Fam Pract. 1997;44:169–176.
- Greene M, Adelman R, Majerovitz SD. Physician and older patient support in the medical encounter. Health Commun. 1996;8:263–279. doi: 10.1207/s15327027hc0803_6.
- Kirmayer L. Multicultural medicine and the politics of recognition. J Med Philos. 2011;36:410–423. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhr024.
- Nasmith L, McMurchy D, Ratner P, Rosenbaum P, Tamblyn R, Wagner E, Transforming care for Canadians with chronic health conditions: put people first, expect the best, manage for results. Ottawa: Canadian Academy of Health Sciences; 2010.
Source: PubMed