Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun;27(3):e14101.
doi: 10.1111/hex.14101.

The Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Managers on Patient Involvement in Care Pathway Development: A Discourse Analysis

Affiliations

The Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Managers on Patient Involvement in Care Pathway Development: A Discourse Analysis

Mildred Visser et al. Health Expect. 2024 Jun.

Abstract

Background: The WHO advocates patient and public involvement as an ethical imperative, due to the value of the lived experience of patients. A deeper understanding of the shared meanings and underlying beliefs of healthcare professionals and managers for and against including patients in care pathway development.

Objective: To explore the considerations of healthcare professionals and managers on the involvement of patients and public in care pathway development.

Methods: In a medical rehabilitation centre we conducted a single case study that was part of a 2-year action research programme on blended care pathway development. Following 14 semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals and managers, we analysed their discourses on the value of patient involvement as well as the potential threats and opportunities.

Results: We identified four discourses. Patient as expert frames involvement as relevant, as adding new perspectives and as required to fully understand the patient's needs. Skills and representation is based on the construct that obtaining valuable insights from patients requires certain skills and competences. Self-protection focusses on personal, interprofessional objections to patient involvement. Professional knows best reveals expertise-related reasons for avoiding or postponing involvement.

Conclusion: These discourses explain why patient and public involvement in care pathway development is sometimes postponed, limited in scope and level of participation, and/or avoided. The following strategies might minimise the paralysing effect of these discourses: strengthen the capabilities of all stakeholders involved; use a mix of complementary techniques to gain involvement in distinct phases of care pathway development; and create/facilitate a safe environment. Put together, these strategies would foster ongoing, reciprocal learning that could enhance patient involvement.

Patient or public contribution: This study belonged to an action research programme on blended care pathway development (developing an integrated, coordinated patient care plan that combines remote, digital telehealth applications, self-management tools and face-to-face care). Multidisciplinary teams took a quality collaborative approach to quality improvement (considering patients as stakeholders) to develop 11 blended care pathways. Although professionals and managers were instructed to invite patients onto their teams and to attend care pathway design workshops, few teams (3/11) actually did. Unravelling why this happened will help improve patient and public involvement in care pathway development.

Keywords: care pathway; co‐creation; co‐design; discourse analysis; patient involvement; qualitative research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Executive Board 1 . “Framework on Integrated, People‐Centred Health Services: Report by the Secretariat” (2016), https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/250704.
    1. World Health Organization . “WHO Framework for Meaningful Engagement of People Living With Noncommunicable Diseases, and Mental Health and Neurological Conditions” (2023), http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/367340.
    1. World Health Organization . “WHO Global Strategy on People‐Centred and Integrated Health Services: Interim Report” (2015), https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/155002.
    1. World Health Organization . “Continuity and Coordination of Care: A Practice Brief to Support Implementation of the Who Framework on Integrated People‐Centred Health Services” (2018), https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/274628.
    1. Cox R., Molineux M., Kendall M., Tanner B., and Miller E., “Co‐Produced Capability Framework for Successful Patient and Staff Partnerships in Healthcare Quality Improvement: Results of a Scoping Review,” BMJ Quality & Safety 31, no. 2 (2022): 134–146, 10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012729. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources