Department of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):208-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00748.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
Client participation has become a dominant policy goal in many countries including the Netherlands and is a topic much discussed in the literature. The success of client participation is usually measured in terms of the extent to which clients have a say in the participation process. Many articles have concluded that client participation is limited; professionals often still control the participation process and outcomes.
The objective of this study is to gain insight into (i) the practice of client participation within a quality improvement collaborative in mental health care and (ii) the consequences of a Foucauldian conceptualization of power in analysing practices of client participation.
We used an ethnographic design consisting of observations of national events and improvement team meetings and interviews with the collaborative's team members and programme managers.
Contrary to many studies on client participation, we found both clients and service providers frequently felt powerless in its practice. Professionals and clients alike struggled with the contributions clients could make to the improvement processes and what functions they should fulfil. Moreover, professionals did not want to exert power upon clients, but ironically just for that reason sometimes struggled with shaping practices of client participation. This mutual powerlessness (partly) disappeared when clients helped to determine and execute specific improvement actions instead of participating in improvement teams.
Recognizing that power is inescapable might allow for a more substantive discussion concerning the consequences that power arrangements produce, rather than looking at who is exerting how much power.
客户参与已成为许多国家(包括荷兰)的主导政策目标,也是文献中讨论较多的话题。客户参与的成功通常以客户在参与过程中的发言权大小来衡量。许多文章得出的结论是,客户参与是有限的;专业人员通常仍然控制参与过程和结果。
本研究旨在深入了解(i)在精神卫生保健质量改进协作中客户参与的实践,以及(ii)分析客户参与实践时福柯权力概念化的后果。
我们使用了一种民族志设计,包括对国家活动和改进团队会议的观察以及对协作团队成员和项目管理人员的访谈。
与许多关于客户参与的研究相反,我们发现客户和服务提供者在实践中经常感到无能为力。专业人员和客户都在努力确定客户可以为改进过程做出的贡献以及他们应该履行的职能。此外,专业人员不想对客户施加权力,但正因为如此,他们有时在塑造客户参与实践方面遇到了困难。当客户帮助确定和执行具体的改进行动,而不是参与改进团队时,这种相互的无能为力(部分)消失了。
认识到权力是不可避免的,可能会允许就权力安排产生的后果进行更实质性的讨论,而不是关注谁在施加多少权力。