4.7 Review

The immaturity of patient engagement in value-based healthcare-A systematic review

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1144027

关键词

value-based healthcare (VBHC); patient engagement; quality improvement; patient perspective; co-design; co-production; communication

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, the concept of Value-Based Healthcare (VBHC) has gained attention in hospitals. Patient engagement is a core component of VBHC, but its involvement at the organizational level of care improvement is lacking research. This systematic review aims to assess the extent and impact of patient engagement in VBHC initiatives. The findings suggest that patient engagement at the organizational level is mostly limited to consultation methods, such as questionnaires and interviews, with a lack of higher level engagement tools. The study emphasizes the importance of embracing all levels of patient engagement to ensure patient values are incorporated in healthcare initiatives.
Introduction: In recent years, Value-Based Healthcare (VBHC) has been gaining traction, particularly in hospitals. A core VBHC element is patient value, i.e., what matters most to the patient and at what cost can this be delivered. This interpretation of value implies patient engagement in patient-doctor communication. Although patient engagement in direct care in the VBHC setting is well described, patient engagement at the organizational level of improving care has hardly been studied. This systematic reviewmaps current knowledge regarding the intensity and impact of patient engagement in VBHC initiatives. We focus on the organizational level of a continuous patient engagement model. Methods: We performed a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines using five electronic databases. The search strategy yielded 1,546 records, of which 21 studies were eligible for inclusion. Search terms were VBHC and patient engagement, or similar keywords, and we included only empirical studies in hospitals or transmural settings at the organizational level. Results: We found that consultation, using either questionnaires or interviews by researchers, is the most common method to involve patients in VBHC. Higher levels of patient engagement, such as advisory roles, co-design, or collaborative teams are rare. We found no examples of the highest level of patient engagement such as patients co-leading care improvement committees. Conclusion: This study included 21 articles, the majority of which were observational, resulting in a limited quality of evidence. Our review shows that patient engagement at the organizational level in VBHC initiatives still relies on low engagement tools such as questionnaires and interviews. Higher-level engagement tools such as advisory roles and collaborative teams are rarely used. Higher-level engagement o ers opportunities to improve healthcare and care pathways through co-design with the people being served. We urge VBHC initiatives to embrace all levels of patient engagement to ensure that patient values find their way to the heart of these initiatives.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据