Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Globally, health‐care systems and organizations are looking to improve health system performance through the implementation of a person‐centred care (PCC) model. While numerous conceptual frameworks for PCC exist, a gap remains in practical guidance on PCC implementation. Methods Based on a narrative review of the PCC literature, a generic conceptual framework was developed in collaboration with a patient partner, which synthesizes evidence, recommendations and best practice from existing frameworks and implementation case studies. The Donabedian model for health‐care improvement was used to classify PCC domains into the categories of “Structure,” “Process” and “Outcome” for health‐care quality improvement. Discussion The framework emphasizes the structural domain, which relates to the health‐care system or context in which care is delivered, providing the foundation for PCC, and influencing the processes and outcomes of care. Structural domains identified include: the creation of a PCC culture across the continuum of care; co‐designing educational programs, as well as health promotion and prevention programs with patients; providing a supportive and accommodating environment; and developing and integrating structures to support health information technology and to measure and monitor PCC performance. Process domains describe the importance of cultivating communication and respectful and compassionate care; engaging patients in managing their care; and integration of care. Outcome domains identified include: access to care and Patient‐Reported Outcomes. Conclusion This conceptual framework provides a step‐wise roadmap to guide health‐care systems and organizations in the provision PCC across various health‐care sectors.

The provision of patient-centered care requires a health care environment that fosters engagement between patients and their health care team. One way to encourage patient-centered care is to incorporate patient-reported outcomes into clinical settings. Collecting these outcomes in routine care ensures that important information only the patient can provide is captured. This provides insights into patients' experiences of symptoms, quality of life, and functioning; values and preferences; and goals for health care. Previously embraced in the research realm, patient-reported outcomes have started to play a role in successful shared decision making, which can enhance the safe and effective delivery of health care. We examine the opportunities for using patient-reported outcomes to enhance care delivery and outcomes as health care information needs and technology platforms change. We highlight emerging practices in which patient-reported outcomes provide value to patients and clinicians and improve care delivery. Finally, we examine present and future challenges to maximizing the use of patient-reported outcomes in the clinic.

Background Patients with multi-morbidity have complex care needs that often make healthcare delivery difficult and costly to manage. Current healthcare delivery is not tailored to the needs of patients with multi-morbidity, although multi-morbidity poses a heavy burden on patients and is related to adverse outcomes. Patient-centered care and co-creation of care are expected to improve outcomes, but the relationships among patient-centered care, co-creation of care, physical well-being, social well-being, and satisfaction with care among patients with multi-morbidity are not known. Methods In 2017, a cross-sectional survey was conducted among 216 (of 394 eligible participants; 55% response rate) patients with multi-morbidity from eight primary care practices in Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to identify relationships among patient-centered care, co-creation of care, physical well-being, social well-being, and satisfaction with care. Results The mean age of the patients was 74.46 ± 10.64 (range, 47–94) years. Less than half (40.8%) of the patients were male, 43.3% were single, and 39.3% were less educated. Patient-centered care and co-creation of care were correlated significantly with patients’ physical well-being, social well-being, and satisfaction with care (all p  ≤ 0.001). Patient-centered care was associated with social well-being ( B  = 0.387, p  ≤ 0.001), physical well-being ( B  = 0.368, p  ≤ 0.001) and satisfaction with care ( B  = 0.425, p  ≤ 0.001). Co-creation of care was associated with social well-being ( B  = 0.112, p  = 0.006) and satisfaction with care ( B  = 0.119, p  = 0.007). Conclusions Patient-centered care and co-creation of care were associated positively with satisfaction with care and the physical and social well-being of patients with multi-morbidity in the primary care setting. Making care more tailored to the needs of patients with multi-morbidity by paying attention to patient-centered care and co-creation of care may contribute to better outcomes.

\"From registered nurse and public health advocate Sana Goldberg, a timely, accessible, and comprehensive guide to the medical industrial complex that teaches readers how to be their own best advocate and get the care they deserve\"-- Provided by publisher.

Patient-centered care is a way of thinking and doing things that considers patients partners in the development of a healthcare plan designed to meet their specific needs. It involves knowledge of the individual as a person and integrates that knowledge into their plan of care. Patient-centered care is central to the discussion of healthcare at the insurance and hospital-level. The quality of the service is evaluated more deeply from all the healthcare components, including insurance payments. It is the start of a new client- and patient-centered healthcare, which is based on a profound respect for patients and the obligation to care for them in partnership with them. Healthcare has been lacking a strategy to teach patients how to take care of themselves as much as they possibly can. In countries with socialized healthcare, patients don’t go to the emergency room unless it is necessary; they have a physician on call instead. This affords more personalized care and avoids patients getting lost in the hospital system. This book advocates the critical role of patients in the health system and the need to encourage healthy living. We need to educate patients on how to be more self-aware, giving them the tools to better understand what they need to do to achieve healthy lifestyles, and the protocols and policies to sustain a better life. Prevention has always been the pinnacle of medical care. It’s time to highlight and share this approach with patients and involve them as active participants in their own healthcare. This is the method on which to build the new healthcare for the next century. ABOUT THE AUTHOR. INTRODUCTION. SECTION 1: PATIENT FIRST. CHAPTER 1 PATIENT-CENTERED CARE. CHAPTER 2 KEY TO ACCESS HEALTH CARE. CHAPTER 3 ADDRESS PATIENTS QUESTIONS AND NEEDS. CHAPTER 4 SHARING VISION OF CARE. CHAPTER 5 MEETING PATIENTS EXPECTATIONS AND SATISFACTIONS. CHAPTER 6 FEAR AND ANXIETY RELIEF: FAMILY CARE. CHAPTER 7 ENGAGING PATIENTS. SECTION 2: TEAM APPROACH. CHAPTER 8 BUILDING TEAM APPROACH AND COMMUNICATIONS. CHAPTER 9 COMMON GROUND WITH THE PATIENTS. CHAPTER 10 CONFUSION OVER CARE. CHAPTER 11 COORDINATE PATIENTS PARTECIPATION. CHAPTER 12 SCHEDULING. CHAPTER 13 DO PATIENTS WANT TO PARTECIPATE? SECTION 3: THE TRUE NORTH. CHAPTER 14 TRANSPARENCY AND HONESTY. CHAPTER 15 THE TRUE NORTH ALIGNEMENT. CHAPTER 16 QUALITY VALUES. CHAPTER 17 OPTIMIZED HEALTH CARE SERVICES. CHAPTER 18 HEALING RELATIONSHIPS. CHAPTER 19 INFORMATION POWER. CHAPTER 20 THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY AND TELEMEDICINE.. SECTION 4: LONG TERM AND CHRONIC CARE. CHAPTER 21 CONTINUITY OF PATIENTS CARE AND ADVANCE DIRECTIVES. CHAPTER 22 INVOLVEMENT OF FAMILY MEMBERS AND CAREGIVERS. CHAPTER 23 LONG TERM FACILITIES. CHAPTER 24 COMFORT LEVEL. CHAPTER 25 CHRONIC CONDITIONS AND PAIN MANAGEMENT. CHAPTER 26 DIGNITY IN DEMENTIA. SECTION 5: BUILDING QUALITY SYSTEMS. CHAPTER 27 PATIENTS FLOW AND PRESS GAINEY SCORE. CHAPTER 28 CLINICAL STAFF AND BETTER PATIENTS EXPERIENCE. CHAPTER 29 FALL PREVENTION: ENGAGING THE FAMILY. CHAPTER 30 HAND HYGIENE. CHAPTER 31 TIME OUT FOR BETTER QUALITY. CHAPTER 32 SET UP STRATEGIES. SECTION 6: HEALTH CARE CHANGE OF THINKING. CHAPTER 33 THE CHANGE OF THINKING. CHAPTER 34 PHYSICAL WELLNESS. CHAPTER 35 CIRCLE OF HEALTH. CHAPTER 36 DIFFICULT PATIENTS. CHAPTER 37 PSYCHOLOGICAL SUPPORT, DEPRESSION, SUICIDE. CHAPTER 38 RESPECT PATIENT CHOICES AND AUTONOMY. Eldo E. Frezza, MD, MBA, FACS has been a board-certified physician for more than 20 years with 8 years of experience in health administration. He has a strong ability to improve financial, supply chain, quality and patient safety operations. He is a visible, hands-on leader with advisory expertise. He has a progressive understanding of flow and throughput with a reputation for establishing improvements and has a knowledge of utilization management. He has served as Chief of Service and Chief of Surgery where he provided leadership and direction to successful transition from operating loss, to financial profit while drastically improving emergency and OR throughput. He also served as Director of Surgical Services for a private hospital where he assessed operations and established new metrics for OR; developed and implemented revised supply chain procedures for the OR to improve efficiency and achieve significant cost savings. He has published books in Business and Ethics in healthcare including, The Business of Surgery, published by Cine-Med, copyright 2007; Professionalism & Ethics in a Surgical Practice published by Cine-Med, copyright 2008; and numerous articles. He received his medical degree Cum Laude from the University of Padua School of Medicine, Italy and his MBA in Health Organization management from Texas Tech Rawls School of Business, Lubbock, TX.

Background: One approach postulated to improve the provision of health care is effective utilization of team-based care including pharmacists. Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review with focused meta-analyses to examine the effects of pharmacist-provided direct patient care on therapeutic, safety, and humanistic outcomes. Methods: The following databases were searched from inception to January 2009: NLM PubMed; Ovid/MEDLINE; ABI/INFORM; Health Business Fulltext Elite; Academic Search Complete; International Pharmaceutical Abstracts; PsycINFO; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; National Guideline Clearinghouse; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects; ClinicalTrials.gov; LexisNexis Academic Universe; and Google Scholar. Studies selected included those reporting pharmacist-provided care, comparison groups, and patient-related outcomes. Of these, 56,573 citations were considered. Data were extracted by multidisciplinary study review teams. Variables examined included study characteristics, pharmacists' interventions/services, patient characteristics, and study outcomes. Data for meta-analyses were extracted from randomized controlled trials meeting meta-analysis criteria. Results: A total of 298 studies were included. Favorable results were found in therapeutic and safety outcomes, and meta-analyses conducted for hemoglobin A1c, LDL cholesterol, blood pressure, and adverse drug events were significant (P < 0.05), favoring pharmacists' direct patient care over comparative services. Results for humanistic outcomes were favorable with variability. Medication adherence, patient knowledge, and quality of life-general health meta-analyses were significant (P < 0.05), favoring pharmacists' direct patient care. Conclusions: Pharmacist-provided direct patient care has favorable effects across various patient outcomes, health care settings, and disease states. Incorporating pharmacists as health care team members in direct patient care is a viable solution to help improve US health care.