• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

让贫困社区参与改善初级保健服务质量:参与式行动研究是否有效?

Involving deprived communities in improving the quality of primary care services: does participatory action research work?

作者信息

Cawston Peter G, Mercer Stewart W, Barbour Rosaline S

机构信息

1Drumchapel Health Centre, Glasgow, UK.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 18;7:88. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-88.

DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-7-88
PMID:17572913
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1906765/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Participation by communities in improving the quality of health services has become a feature of government policy in the United Kingdom. The aim of the study was to involve a deprived community in the UK in shaping quality improvements of local primary care services. The specific objectives were firstly to create participation by local people in evaluating the primary care services available in the area and secondly to bring about change as a result of this process.

METHODS

The methods of participatory action research was used. The study was set in an area of high socio-economic deprivation served by a 'Local Health Care Co-operative' in a peripheral housing estate in Glasgow, Scotland. 72 local residents took part in 11 focus groups: eight of these were with community groups and three with other residents. 372 local residents completed questionnaires either by brief face-to-face interviews (114) or by self or carer completion (258).

RESULTS

The study group produced recommendations on physical access to the health centre, time constraints in accessing services and problems encountered in individual relationships with health staff. They also highlighted the social gap between health service providers and the daily life of community residents. Action was taken to bring these recommendations to the attention of the Primary Care Organisation.

CONCLUSION

Participatory action research was used to involve a deprived community in the UK in a 'bottom-up' approach aimed at improving quality of local primary care services. Although successful in creating a partnership between academic researchers and lay researchers and participation by local people in evaluating the primary care services available in the area, the impact of the study in terms of immediate action taken over specific issues has been modest. The possible reasons for this are discussed.

摘要

背景

社区参与改善医疗服务质量已成为英国政府政策的一个特点。该研究的目的是让英国一个贫困社区参与塑造当地初级医疗服务的质量改进。具体目标一是让当地人参与评估该地区现有的初级医疗服务,二是通过这一过程带来改变。

方法

采用参与式行动研究方法。该研究在苏格兰格拉斯哥一个外围住宅区由“地方医疗保健合作社”服务的高社会经济贫困地区进行。72名当地居民参加了11个焦点小组:其中8个是与社区团体,3个是与其他居民。372名当地居民通过简短的面对面访谈(114人)或自行或由照顾者填写(258人)完成了问卷。

结果

研究小组就前往健康中心的实际便利性、获取服务的时间限制以及与医护人员的个人关系中遇到的问题提出了建议。他们还强调了医疗服务提供者与社区居民日常生活之间的社会差距。已采取行动将这些建议提请初级医疗保健组织注意。

结论

参与式行动研究被用于让英国一个贫困社区以“自下而上”的方式参与旨在提高当地初级医疗服务质量的活动。尽管该研究成功地在学术研究人员和非专业研究人员之间建立了合作关系,并让当地人参与评估该地区现有的初级医疗服务,但就针对具体问题立即采取的行动而言,该研究的影响不大。文中讨论了可能的原因。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c1bb/1906765/1d77a21fe83e/1472-6963-7-88-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c1bb/1906765/453698a90f67/1472-6963-7-88-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c1bb/1906765/1d77a21fe83e/1472-6963-7-88-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c1bb/1906765/453698a90f67/1472-6963-7-88-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c1bb/1906765/1d77a21fe83e/1472-6963-7-88-2.jpg

相似文献

1
Involving deprived communities in improving the quality of primary care services: does participatory action research work?让贫困社区参与改善初级保健服务质量:参与式行动研究是否有效?
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun 18;7:88. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-88.
2
Qualitative needs assessment: healthcare experiences of underserved populations in Montgomery County, Virginia, USA.定性需求评估:美国弗吉尼亚州蒙哥马利县服务不足人群的医疗保健经历
Rural Remote Health. 2012;12:1816. Epub 2012 Jul 17.
3
Using consecutive Rapid Participatory Appraisal studies to assess, facilitate and evaluate health and social change in community settings.运用连续的快速参与式评估研究,以评估、促进和评价社区环境中的健康与社会变革。
BMC Public Health. 2006 Mar 15;6:68. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-68.
4
Examining intersectional inequalities in access to health (enabling) resources in disadvantaged communities in Scotland: advancing the participatory paradigm.探讨苏格兰弱势社区获取健康(赋权)资源方面的交叉不平等问题:推进参与式范式。
Int J Equity Health. 2018 Sep 24;17(1):83. doi: 10.1186/s12939-018-0797-x.
5
Quality in general practice consultations; a qualitative study of the views of patients living in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland.全科医疗咨询中的质量;对生活在苏格兰社会经济高度贫困地区的患者观点的定性研究。
BMC Fam Pract. 2007 Apr 19;8:22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-8-22.
6
Reducing diabetes health disparities through community-based participatory action research: the Chicago Southeast Diabetes Community Action Coalition.通过基于社区的参与性行动研究减少糖尿病健康差异:芝加哥东南部糖尿病社区行动联盟
Public Health Rep. 2003 Jul-Aug;118(4):309-23. doi: 10.1093/phr/118.4.309.
7
What older people want: evidence from a study of remote Scottish communities.老年人想要什么:来自对苏格兰偏远社区的一项研究的证据。
Rural Remote Health. 2009 Apr-Jun;9(2):1166. Epub 2009 Jun 24.
8
Patients, prisoners, or people? Women prisoners' experiences of primary care in prison: a qualitative study.患者、囚犯,还是人?女性囚犯在监狱中的初级医疗护理体验:一项定性研究。
Br J Gen Pract. 2008 Sep;58(554):630-6. doi: 10.3399/bjgp08X330771.
9
Putting partnership into practice: participatory wellbeing assessment on a south London housing estate.将伙伴关系付诸实践:伦敦南部一个住宅区的参与式福祉评估。
Health Expect. 2003 Mar;6(1):30-43. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00206.x.
10
'Taking off the suit': engaging the community in primary health care decision-making.“脱下制服”:让社区参与初级卫生保健决策
Health Expect. 2006 Mar;9(1):70-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00364.x.

引用本文的文献

1
A Proposal for Addressing Bioethical Concerns Along the 10-Step Framework for Community Engagement.关于在社区参与的十步框架中解决生物伦理问题的提案。
Health Expect. 2025 Aug;28(4):e70345. doi: 10.1111/hex.70345.
2
Adapting an Osteoarthritis Peer Mentorship Intervention for Remote Delivery to People Experiencing Socioeconomic Disadvantage: A Multi-Method Approach.调整骨关节炎同伴指导干预措施以远程提供给处于社会经济不利地位的人群:一种多方法途径。
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70245. doi: 10.1111/hex.70245.
3
Optimizing the Maastricht Work-Related Support intervention in clinical patient care: the value of integrating action research into intervention mapping.

本文引用的文献

1
Quality in general practice consultations; a qualitative study of the views of patients living in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland.全科医疗咨询中的质量;对生活在苏格兰社会经济高度贫困地区的患者观点的定性研究。
BMC Fam Pract. 2007 Apr 19;8:22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-8-22.
2
Using consecutive Rapid Participatory Appraisal studies to assess, facilitate and evaluate health and social change in community settings.运用连续的快速参与式评估研究,以评估、促进和评价社区环境中的健康与社会变革。
BMC Public Health. 2006 Mar 15;6:68. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-68.
3
Clients or citizens? Some considerations for primary care organisations.
优化马斯特里赫特工作相关支持干预措施在临床患者护理中的应用:将行动研究纳入干预映射的价值。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Mar 11;24(1):325. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-10752-3.
4
Community Dermatology: Current Status and the Way Forward.社区皮肤病学:现状与未来发展方向
Indian Dermatol Online J. 2023 Oct 5;14(6):762-768. doi: 10.4103/idoj.idoj_497_22. eCollection 2023 Nov-Dec.
5
A rapid realist review of patient engagement in patient-oriented research and health care system impacts: part one.以患者为导向的研究中患者参与及医疗保健系统影响的快速实证综述:第一部分。
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Oct 10;7(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00299-6.
6
Participatory health research with migrants: Opportunities, challenges, and way forwards.参与式移民健康研究:机遇、挑战与前进方向。
Health Expect. 2021 Apr;24(2):188-197. doi: 10.1111/hex.13201. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
7
Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review.参与患者以提高医疗质量:系统评价。
Implement Sci. 2018 Jul 26;13(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0784-z.
8
Clients' Perspectives on Quality of Delivery Services in a Rural Setting in Tanzania: Findings from a Qualitative Action-Oriented Research.坦桑尼亚农村地区客户对分娩服务质量的看法:一项以行动为导向的定性研究结果
Int J MCH AIDS. 2017;6(1):60-68. doi: 10.21106/ijma.191.
9
Access to primary care for socioeconomically disadvantaged older people in rural areas: a realist review.农村地区社会经济弱势老年人获得初级保健服务的情况:一项现实主义综述。
BMJ Open. 2016 May 17;6(5):e010652. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010652.
10
What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review.公众参与医疗保健政策的证据基础是什么?:一项系统综述的结果
Health Expect. 2015 Apr;18(2):153-65. doi: 10.1111/hex.12038. Epub 2012 Dec 18.
客户还是公民?基层医疗组织的一些考量
Br J Gen Pract. 2003 Sep;53(494):716-22.
4
Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care.关于让患者参与医疗保健规划与发展的系统评价。
BMJ. 2002 Nov 30;325(7375):1263. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7375.1263.
5
How can action research apply to health services?行动研究如何应用于卫生服务?
Qual Health Res. 2001 Jul;11(4):436-49. doi: 10.1177/104973201129119235.
6
Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.获取公众对医疗保健的偏好:技术的系统评价
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(5):1-186. doi: 10.3310/hta5050.
7
Qualitative research in health care. Using qualitative methods in health related action research.医疗保健中的定性研究。在健康相关行动研究中运用定性方法。
BMJ. 2000 Jan 15;320(7228):178-81. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7228.178.
8
Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. North American Primary Care Research Group.参与式研究能最大限度地提高社区和非专业人士的参与度。北美初级保健研究组。
BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):774-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774.
9
Meanings of community.社区的含义。
Soc Sci Med. 1996 Aug;43(4):555-63. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00439-4.
10
Using focus groups in general practice research.在全科医疗研究中运用焦点小组。
Fam Pract. 1995 Sep;12(3):328-34. doi: 10.1093/fampra/12.3.328.