General Practice Research Unit, Department of Public Health and General Practice, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway;
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2013 Sep 20;8:21498. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v8i0.21498.
Repeated encounters over time enable general practitioners (GPs) to accumulate biomedical and biographical knowledge about their patients. A growing body of evidence documenting the medical relevance of lifetime experiences indicates that health personnel ought to appraise this type of knowledge and consider how to incorporate it into their treatment of patients. In order to explore the interdisciplinary communication of such knowledge within Norwegian health care, we conducted a research project at the interface between general practice and a nursing home.
In the present study, nine Norwegian GPs were each interviewed about one of their patients who had recently been admitted to a nursing home for short-term rehabilitation. A successive interview conducted with each of these patients aimed at both validating the GP's information and exploring the patient's life story. The GP's treatment opinions and the patient's biographical information and treatment preferences were condensed into a biographical record presented to the nursing home staff. The transcripts of the interviews and the institutional treatment measures were compared and analysed, applying a phenomenological-hermeneutical framework. In the present article, we compare and discuss: (1) the GPs' specific recommendations for their patients; (2) the patients' own wishes and perceived needs; and (3) if and how this information was integrated into the institution's interventions and priorities.
Each GP made rehabilitation recommendations, which included statements regarding both the patient's personality and life circumstances. The nursing home staff individualized their selection of therapeutic interventions based on defined standardized treatment approaches, without personalizing them.
We found that the institutional voice of medicine consistently tends to override the voice of the patient's lifeworld. Thus, despite the institution's best intentions, their efforts to provide appropriate rehabilitation seem to have been jeopardized to some extent.
随着时间的推移,全科医生(GP)会多次接触患者,从而积累有关患者的生物医学和传记知识。越来越多的证据记录了生活经历对医学的重要性,这表明卫生人员应该评估这种类型的知识,并考虑如何将其纳入对患者的治疗中。为了探索挪威医疗保健中这种知识的跨学科交流,我们在全科医学和养老院之间的界面进行了一个研究项目。
在本研究中,对 9 名挪威全科医生进行了访谈,每位医生都对最近因短期康复而入住养老院的一位患者进行了访谈。对每位患者进行了连续访谈,目的是验证全科医生的信息并探讨患者的生活故事。将全科医生的治疗意见以及患者的传记信息和治疗偏好浓缩成一份传记记录,提交给养老院工作人员。将访谈的文字记录和机构治疗措施进行了比较和分析,应用了现象学-解释学框架。在本文中,我们比较和讨论了:(1)全科医生对其患者的具体建议;(2)患者自身的愿望和感知需求;以及(3)这些信息是否以及如何被纳入机构的干预措施和重点。
每位全科医生都提出了康复建议,其中包括关于患者个性和生活环境的陈述。养老院工作人员根据既定的标准化治疗方法,基于个人特点选择治疗干预措施,而不是个性化选择。
我们发现,医疗机构的声音往往会压倒患者生活世界的声音。因此,尽管机构有良好的意愿,但他们提供适当康复的努力在某种程度上似乎受到了威胁。