13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Being Heard, Exerting Influence, or Knowing How to Play the Game? Expectations of Client Involvement among Social and Health Care Professionals and Clients

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Contemporary social and health care services exhibit a significant movement toward increasing client involvement in their own care and in the development of services. This major cultural change represents a marked shift in the client’s role from a passive patient to an active empowered agent. We draw on interaction-oriented focus group research and conversation analysis to study workshop conversations in which social and health care clients and professionals discussed “client involvement”. Our analysis focuses on the participants’ mutually congruent or discrepant views on the topic. The professionals and clients both saw client involvement as an ideal that should be promoted. Although both participant groups considered the clients’ experience of being heard a prerequisite of client involvement, the clients deviated from the professionals in that they also highlighted the need for actual decision-making power. However, when the professionals invoked the clients’ responsibility for their own treatment, the clients were not eager to agree with their view. In addition, in analyzing problems of client involvement during the clients’ and professionals’ meta-talk about client involvement, the paper also shows how the “client involvement” rhetoric itself may, paradoxically, sometimes serve to hinder here-and-now client involvement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references59

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring patient-centered communication in patient-physician consultations: theoretical and practical issues.

            The goal of patient-centered communication (PCC) is to help practitioners provide care that is concordant with the patient's values, needs and preferences, and that allows patients to provide input and participate actively in decisions regarding their health and health care. PCC is widely endorsed as a central component of high-quality health care, but it is unclear what it is and how to measure it. PCC includes four communication domains: the patient's perspective, the psychosocial context, shared understanding, and sharing power and responsibility. Problems in measuring PCC include lack of theoretical and conceptual clarity, unexamined assumptions, lack of adequate control for patient characteristics and social contexts, modest correlations between survey and observational measures, and overlap of PCC with other constructs. We outline problems in operationalizing PCC, choosing tools for assessing PCC, choosing data sources, identifying mediators of PCC, and clarifying outcomes of PCC. We propose nine areas for improvement: (1) developing theory-based operational definitions of PCC; (2) clarifying what is being measured; (3) accounting for the communication behaviors of each individual in the encounter as well as interactions among them; (4) accounting for context; (5) validating of instruments; (6) interpreting patient ratings of their physicians; (7) doing longitudinal studies; (8) examining pathways and mediators of links between PCC and outcomes; and (9) dealing with the complexity of the construct of PCC. We discuss the use of observational and survey measures, multi-method and mixed-method research, and standardized patients. The increasing influence of the PCC literature to guide medical education, licensure of clinicians, and assessments of quality provides a strong rationale for further clarification of these measurement issues.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Using and analysing focus groups: Limitations and possibilities

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                05 August 2020
                August 2020
                : 17
                : 16
                : 5653
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 40, FI-00032 Helsinki, Finland; sari.kapykangas@ 123456ttl.fi
                [2 ]Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 54, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland; lise-lotte.uusitalo@ 123456helsinki.fi (L.-L.U.); melisa.stevanovic@ 123456helsinki.fi (M.S.)
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6879-6004
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0028-9492
                Article
                ijerph-17-05653
                10.3390/ijerph17165653
                7460515
                32764434
                550c5a78-8c41-43dc-aceb-1487ad4d0f3d
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 29 June 2020
                : 01 August 2020
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                client involvement,client participation,cultural change,co-development,conversation analysis,social and health care professionals,interaction,qualitative research

                Comments

                Comment on this article