Figure 4 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported
Content may be subject to copyright.
McCormack and McCance's "The Person-centred Practice Framework re-presented." Notes: Republished with permission of John Wiley & Sons -Books from McCormack B, McCance T, Klopper H. Person-Centred Practice in Nursing and Health Care: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2016; permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. 52
Source publication
Anthony W Olson,1,2 Timothy P Stratton,2 Brian J Isetts,3 Rajiv Vaidyanathan,4 Jared C Van Hooser,2 Jon C Schommer3 1Research Division, Essentia Institute of Rural Health, Duluth, MN, USA; 2Department of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Minnesota – College of Pharmacy, Duluth, MN, USA; 3Department of Pharmaceutical Care...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... third seminal stream of PC research identified in this review combined works from McCormack on "authentic consciousness" (ie, autonomy) 49 and McCance on care in Nursing 50 to create the Person-centered Nursing Framework. 51 The most recent iteration of this model was renamed the Person-centred Practice Framework (PCPF) and is represented in Figure 4. 9,52 The PCPF contains 25 concepts layered into five sequentially-ordered categories that must be fulfilled in a stepwise fashion to facilitate care service organization and delivery that center on the individualized needs of each patient. ...
Citations
... These approaches enable a better understanding is gained of phenomena by seeing it within a wider context. Olson et al. 2021 [37] uses the allegory of the blind monks who examine the elephant, where close inspection of one part of the whole means that meaning is lost. A complete picture is needed to really understand what the elephant is. ...
Scoping reviews, mapping reviews, and evidence and gap maps are evidence synthesis methodologies that address broad research questions, aiming to describe a bigger picture rather than address a specific question about intervention effectiveness. They are being increasingly used to support a range of purposes including guiding research priorities and decision making. There is however a confusing array of terminology used to describe these different approaches. In this commentary, we aim to describe where there are differences in terminology and where this equates to differences in meaning. We demonstrate the different theoretical routes that underpin these differences. We suggest ways in which the approaches of scoping and mapping reviews may differ in order to guide consistency in reporting and method. We propose that mapping and scoping reviews and evidence and gap maps have similarities that unite them as a group but also have unique differences. Understanding these similarities and differences is important for informing the development of methods used to undertake and report these types of evidence synthesis.
... PCC has been associated worldwide as a model related to increased quality and safety measures in clinical interactions between patients and health professionals. As opposed to paternalistic clinical practice, the PCC is a moral imperative with an invaluable purpose, regardless of the clinical results it produces [15]. ...
... It was first mentioned in 1952 in a nursing journal that described a personalized patient care plan [18]. Another origin cited more frequently refers to the sketches initiated in 1957 by psychiatrist Michael Balint, accompanied by his wife Enid Balint, who carried out studies called Patient-Centered Medicine, defining it as the total experience of the patient's illness [15]. But it was not until the late 1980s that the inclusion of the patient in the center of healthcare gained strength and began to be disseminated mainly through the Picker Institute. ...
Patient-centered care lies at the center of the Joint Commission of Pharmacy Practitioners Pharmacists' Patient Care Process (PPCP) and recognizes the pharmacist's responsibility for the patient's drug-related and health needs, concerns, and expectations as well as prioritizing the patient's interests before all others. Person-centered care more explicitly expands the pharmacist's understanding of the patient to a person with rights, knowledge, and experiences that extend outside of disease, illness, and pharmacotherapy. The Social Care Framework developed by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine provides a roadmap to how pharmacists can provide community-integrated care that is consistent with person-centeredness. Doing so can expand the pharmacist's role and value in a time of community-integrated care transformation.
Introduction
Evidence‐based practice is necessary for improving chronic disease prevention, reduction, and management while simultaneously lowering care costs. Patient‐centeredness encompasses one of three essential and overlapping components of evidence‐based practice, the others being clinical expertise and scientific/research evidence. While patient‐centered care was placed at the center of the Joint Commission of Pharmacy Practitioners Pharmacists' Patient Care Process (PPCP), few studies investigate the concept's meaning in outpatient pharmacist care.
Objectives
This study explores the meaning of patient‐centeredness from the perspectives of patients and their pharmacists participating in outpatient care consistent with the PPCP, and compares the elements that matter most between these two groups.
Methods
Data for this exploratory QUALquan mixed methods study were collected via in‐depth interviews designed to elicit perceptions of what matters to patients in pharmacist care from a purposive sample of adult patients with multiple chronic conditions and their outpatient pharmacists in the United States. Data were assessed using directed content analysis informed by 40 seminal patient‐centeredness concepts from the health professional literatures of medicine, nursing, and health policy.
Results
Data analysis produced 13 distinct superordinate concepts representing the meaning of patient‐centeredness in the context of the PPCP. The perceived importance of the patient‐centeredness superordinate concepts was generally consistent between patients and pharmacist groups except for “Therapeutic Alliance,” “Care Coordination and Integration,” and “Care Experience.”
Conclusion
This study's superordinate concepts of patient‐centeredness adds clarity for what matters to patients in pharmacist care encounters, key elements for organizing team‐based systems to meet the unique needs of each patient, and upstream factors that can facilitate or prevent patient‐centered care. Future research should assess the reproducibility of the findings, explore reasons behind patient‐pharmacist priority differences, and evaluate the resulting impact.
