Jones Margaret N, Heaney Clare, Obayan Jessica, Vollmer Daniela, Arenas Monica, Muhammad Malika, Prophett Raffel, White Patricia, Seid Moshe, Quinonez Elizabeth B, Lipps Lauren, Henize Adrienne W, Unaka Ndidi I, Beck Andrew F
Department of Pediatrics (MN Jones, C Heaney, AW Henize, and AF Beck), University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio; Division of General & Community Pediatrics (MN Jones, L Lipps, AW Henize, and AF Beck), Cincinnati Children's, Cincinnati, Ohio; Michael A. Fisher Child Health Equity Center (MN Jones, M Arenas, M Seid, EB Quinonez, AW Henize, and AF Beck), Cincinnati Children's, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Department of Pediatrics (MN Jones, C Heaney, AW Henize, and AF Beck), University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Acad Pediatr. 2025 Jul;25(5):102816. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2025.102816. Epub 2025 Mar 13.
To generate qualitative insights with patients, families, and community partners to catalyze nimble, aligned medical-social care responses.
This study employed qualitative and co-design methods. We partnered with 4 peer researchers who interviewed individuals living in Greater Cincinnati with recent experience as pediatric patients or caregivers of pediatric patients. Interviews assessed ways in which health care, human services, patients, families, and communities do (or do not) collaborate to provide medical-social care. Interview transcripts were independently reviewed by an analytic team, inclusive of peer researchers, co-design experts, and pediatric clinicians and researchers. Findings were validated during community discussions, facilitating identification of themes and opportunity areas for intervention.
Peer researchers conducted 19 interviews (14 English and 5 Spanish). Interviewees included individuals ranging from young adults (recent patients) to older adults with lived experience as caregivers of pediatric patients. Most identified as minority race and ethnicity and lived in socioeconomically disadvantaged Cincinnati neighborhoods. Themes related to structural barriers included 1) services are difficult to navigate; 2) medical and social care are often reactive (or nonexistent) when they could be proactive; and 3) medical and social care could be more closely integrated. Themes related to human factors included 4) medical and social service institutions are often untrustworthy; 5) diversified care teams with shared lived experiences could improve care delivery; and 6) optimal care requires empathy, clear communication, and partnership.
Patients, families, and community members identified themes and opportunity areas for improving medical and social care delivery. Next steps include the implementation and evaluation of prototype interventions.
与患者、家庭及社区合作伙伴进行定性研究，以推动灵活、协调一致的医疗-社会护理应对措施。
本研究采用定性和协同设计方法。我们与4名同行研究人员合作，他们对居住在大辛辛那提地区、近期有儿科患者或儿科患者护理经历的个人进行了访谈。访谈评估了医疗保健、人类服务、患者、家庭和社区在提供医疗-社会护理方面（或未）进行合作的方式。访谈记录由一个分析团队独立审查，该团队包括同行研究人员、协同设计专家、儿科临床医生和研究人员。研究结果在社区讨论中得到验证，有助于确定干预的主题和机会领域。
同行研究人员进行了19次访谈（14次英语访谈和5次西班牙语访谈）。受访者包括从年轻人（近期患者）到有儿科患者护理经历的老年人。大多数受访者为少数族裔，居住在辛辛那提社会经济条件不利的社区。与结构性障碍相关的主题包括：1）服务难以导航；2）医疗和社会护理在可以主动提供时往往是被动的（或不存在的）；3）医疗和社会护理可以更紧密地整合。与人为因素相关的主题包括：4）医疗和社会服务机构往往不值得信任；5）具有共同生活经历的多元化护理团队可以改善护理服务；6）最佳护理需要同理心、清晰的沟通和合作关系。
患者、家庭和社区成员确定了改善医疗和社会护理服务的主题和机会领域。下一步包括实施和评估原型干预措施。
