Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNaldemirci, Ö
dc.contributor.authorLydahl, D
dc.contributor.authorBritten, N
dc.contributor.authorElam, M
dc.contributor.authorMoore, L
dc.contributor.authorWolf, A
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-18T13:46:35Z
dc.date.issued2016-11-22
dc.description.abstractIn recent decades, the 'tenacious assumptions' of biomedicine regarding the neutrality and universality of its knowledge claims have been significantly challenged by the growth of new collaborative and patient-focused models of Healthcare delivery. In this article, we discuss and critically reflect upon one such alternative Healthcare model developed at the University of Gothenburg Centre for Person-Centred Care in Sweden. This centre uses three clinical routines of narrative, partnership and documentation to provide Healthcare to people recognized as unique individuals rather than patients. Person-centred care in Gothenburg and more broadly is based on the assumption that a person is independently capable of reasoning and verbal expression and willing to provide clear and genuine narratives and cooperate with Healthcare professionals However, we argue that by emphasizing individual capabilities of reasoning and verbal expression, an unnecessarily limited conception of personhood risks being imposed on these routines. Drawing upon semi-structured interviews with researchers in three very different Gothenburg Centre for Person-Centred Care research projects - about healthy ageing in migrant communities, neurogenic communication disorders, and psychosis - we highlight that how persons are recognized as unique and capable varies significantly in practice across different Healthcare settings. Thus, we assert that person-centred care's own potentially tenacious assumptions about the attributes of personhood risk distracting attention away from the variety of creative ways that professionals and persons promisingly find for translating the ideal of person-centred care into practice.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThe author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The study was supported by the Centre for Person-Centred Care (GPCC) and LETStudio at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. It was also supported by the University of Exeter. Nicky Britten was partially supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula at the Royal Devon and Exeter National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationpublished online 22 November 2016en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/1363459316677627
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/27587
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27879342en_GB
dc.subjectpartnershipen_GB
dc.subjectpatient narrativeen_GB
dc.subjectpersonen_GB
dc.subjectperson-centred careen_GB
dc.titleTenacious assumptions of person-centred care? Exploring tensions and variations in practiceen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2017-05-18T13:46:35Z
exeter.place-of-publicationEnglanden_GB
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalHealth: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicineen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record