Participatory Medicine by Patients
The contemporary era is full of illnesses ranging from diabetes to chronic disorders, which force the Patient to be the primary caregiver. Many people who suffer from these diseases take little Time with doctors and spend more take care of themselves. The biggest issue is how to help patients participate in healthcare. Inadequate information and limited information to guest hinter their ability to participate in health and healthcare. Bioethics gives a reminder that Patients must be equipped with the right information before giving out their consent. The Patient-Centered Outcome Research Institute is working to give compelling and adequate information on the comparative efficiency of clinical treatments, which allow the patients to make decisions on merits. Electronic health data that can help the patients understand and influence what is being discussed about them in their medical charts have not been well elaborated regardless of recent moves of OpenNotes. The issue of Patient having limited participation on healthcare is reducing the effectiveness and efficiency of healthcare systems but is believed giving the Patient the chance to participate in health care will not only help them choose the type of treatment they want but also help in defining clinical problem which should be addressed. A medical diagnosis conducted by the physicians helps connect the pathophysiology and prognostic knowledge and assist in achieving effective therapy. Most are the times when the diagnosis omits the Patient’s experience about the illness ranging from the symptoms to the full impairments? The paper will address how bypassing the Patient’s perspective affects the Patient’s quality of life and therapy processes as part of PICOT. Different studies have been conducted about the PICOT and Participatory Medicine and articles published to address different PICOT scenarios.
The method used in choosing the Articles
From the articles, it is where the literature review was acquired. To get compelling information, the articles must have relevant information about the subject matter. The criteria that I used were to ensure that the article had specific clinical issues and how PICOT was being revealed. The articles were current, not old than five years, to ensure that the material they give is current and has contemporary issues about healthcare. Another consideration was historical interest in how the article was linking the past events with the current healthcare and clinical issues concerning patients. The articles were coherent and revolved around the research question, Participatory Medicine, as part of PICOT. Articles also were from known institutions and experienced writers free from political biases and other socio-economic biases.
Literature Review
Engaging the patients for the desired outcomes is one of the most compelling issues in the clinical world. Ensuring that patients have their voice out has affected the way healthcare is being administered. People across different demographics are experiencing different challenges in participatory MedicineMedicine, but the largest number is the aging Population ranging from 45 and above years. An article called Transforming the Culture of Patient Care found in the Journal known as Society for Participatory Medicine holds that the aging Population and technology are changing the healthcare business. The article holds that technology is picking up the game-changer by driving the Patient to connect more with doctors and healthcare providers. It creates criteria at which participatory MedicineMedicine can be gaged against, including improved health outcomes, more satisfaction, and reduced healthcare costs. Another article called Building a patient-centered and interprofessional training program with patients, students, and care professionals describe different ways of achieving Patient-centered healthcare that promotes participatory design. It gives the insight that shared approaches that improve patient-centered care involve professional training. The Participatory design and evaluation study used the combined patient training and medical education to achieve the co-creation of a patient-centered and professionals from various departments training, as well students and experts train together to enhance patient-centeredness of care.
Article from the Journal of Canadian Chiropractic Association called what your research question is? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians described that around 1% to 7% of chiropractic experts engage in Canada engage in research. The growing demand for evidence-based moves in the healthcare systems is pushing the clinicians to apply their decision on the most basic available scientific evidence. When the clinicians do not engage more in the research, there is little transfer of knowledge to healthcare and practical. Dosage effects of spinal manipulative therapy for chronic neck pain were used as the research question. The neck pain was reported as significant musculoskeletal across the Population and was seen to last for more than 90 days. That called for presenting to a chiropractic office, and most of the Time, such patience gets more spinal manipulation and drives the benefit of these pain manipulation and therapy. The clinician knowledge and patient knowledge are crucial. Applying the PICOT in the study to determine the right dosage of spinal manipulation, a Population of adults aged 18 to 60 years was sampled who had a diagnosis of chronicle neck pain. They had not received Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Intervention, randomly, the subjects were to receive standard rotary as well lateral breaks formula which is diversified once, twice or even three times every week for an extended period of 2 to 6 weeks. The subjects would get the same exercise to obtain a desirable outcome. Comparison there set supervised routine regimen would be employed s active control group. Throughout the exercise, different results would be averaged. The outcome, the neck pain changes were measured using 100mm VAS for pain. Time and the outcome were monitored for 6 weeks. It was found that clinician participation holding the fact “gold standard” rotary or the lateral break, the diversified formula and capability of teaching would be essential in planning on Patient’s recruitment.
Patient education and counseling, patient empowerment are the other two articles that have tried to figure out the need for patient participation in the healthcare processes. They analyze patients’ concept of patients’ participation as crucial in setting up PICOT questions and determining the time frame for various diseases and healthcare concepts. The failure to have conceptual clarity has contributed to poor understanding among the health expert, policymakers, and researchers hence leaving a gap in targeted populations and failure to achieve the desired outcome in a given time. Again it has led to problems in measuring and comparing studies in different institutions across different hospitals.
Articles Comparison
The articles had different views concerning the Participatory Medicine as part of PICOT. All articles have the same sense that participatory MedicineMedicine is crucial, and it can be achieved through proper engagement of patents and physicians, and experts in the healthcare systems. For the patients to attain the right outcome, there should be good traffic of information from the patients to the doctors, and the patients should not be bypassed. The studies also have common conclusions that when patients’ perspectives are bypassed, the chances are that clinicians are likely to commit faults in administering healthcare.
The articles have shown some differences in the populations where some feel the patients who get despised are the aged populations. The studies did not focus much on the children and young Populations below 15 years who also need to be included in Participatory Medicine. Different articles feel that clinicians and professionals should play a significant role in ensuring Participatory Medicine by conducting research and including the patients in the comprehensive findings on various conclusions. Although these articles emphasize the Patient’s participation, they have not elaborated how the participants can be achieved, making it a significant limitation of the studies. There is also a contradiction of participation and treatment where some feel that Patient’s engagement should commence once diagnosed, and others feel that it should be routine even at the best of the health. More research should be conducted to determine how the Patient’s Participation can impact health, especially for the Aged Population, which is on the verge of chronic diseases.
Conclusion
To ensure that the Patient is well covered across all demographics, there should be a comprehensive connection between the stakeholders, the patients, health professionals, policymakers, and government, to ensure there is a useful framework for participatory MedicineMedicine by patients. Participatory MedicineMedicine continues to challenge healthcare systems and the PICOT execution process due to limited information that makes the patients seek assistance at advanced stages of illness, which has to cause a lot of health crises. To achieve the Population, right Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome at the Right Time, all professionals and other key stakeholders must engage the patients more and offer information that will ensure more participation.