Purpose: To gain a rich understanding of the experiences and opinions of patients, healthcare professionals, and policymakers regarding the design of OGR with structure, process, environment, and outcome components. Methods: Qualitative research based on the constructive grounded theory approach is performed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who received OGR (n=13), two focus groups with healthcare professionals (n=13), and one focus group with policymakers (n=4). The Post-acute Care Rehabilitation quality framework was used as a theoretical background in all research steps. Results: The data analysis of all perspectives resulted in seven themes: the outcome of OGR focuses on the patient’s independence and regaining control over their functioning at home. Essential process elements are a patient-oriented network, a well-coordinated dedicated team at home, and blended eHealth applications. Additionally, closer cooperation in integrated care and refinement regarding financial, time-management, and technological challenges is needed with implementation into a permanent structure. All steps should be influenced by the stimulating aspect of the physical and social rehabilitation environment. Conclusion: The three perspectives generally complement each other to regain patients’ quality of life and autonomy. This study demonstrates an overview of the building blocks that can be used in developing and designing an OGR trajectory.
Motivational interviewing (MI) may be an effective intervention to improve medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, for this patient group, mixed results have been found in randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, the process of becoming (more) motivated for long-term medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia is largely unexplored
Background: Patient participation in goal setting is important to deliver client-centered care. In daily practice, however, patient involvement in goal setting is not optimal. Patient-specific instruments, such as the Patient Specific Complaints (PSC) instrument, can support the goal-setting process because patients can identify and rate their own problems. The aim of this study is to explore patients’ experiences with the feasibility of the PSC, in the physiotherapy goal setting. Method: We performed a qualitative study. Data were collected by observations of physiotherapy sessions (n=23) and through interviews with patients (n=23) with chronic conditions in physiotherapy practices. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Results: The PSC was used at different moments and in different ways. Two feasibility themes were analyzed. First was the perceived ambiguity with the process of administration: patients perceived a broad range of experiences, such as emotional and supportive, as well as feeling a type of uncomfortableness. The second was the perceived usefulness: patients found the PSC useful for themselves – to increase awareness and motivation and to inform the physiotherapist – as well as being useful for the physiotherapist – to determine appropriate treatment for their personal needs. Some patients did not perceive any usefulness and were not aware of any relation with their treatment. Patients with a more positive attitude toward questionnaires, patients with an active role, and health-literate patients appreciated the PSC and felt facilitated by it. Patients who lacked these attributes did not fully understand the PSC’s process or purpose and let the physiotherapist take the lead. Conclusion: The PSC is a feasible tool to support patient participation in the physiotherapy goal setting. However, in the daily use of the PSC, patients are not always fully involved and informed. Patients reported varied experiences related to their personal attributes and modes of administration. This means that the PSC cannot be used in the same way in every patient. It is perfectly suited to use in a dialogue manner, which makes it very suitable to improve goal setting within client-centered care.
The ELSA AI lab Northern Netherlands (ELSA-NN) is committed to the promotion of healthy living, working and ageing. By investigating cultural, ethical, legal, socio-political, and psychological aspects of the use of AI in different decision-makingcontexts and integrating this knowledge into an online ELSA tool, ELSA-NN aims to contribute to knowledge about trustworthy human-centric AI and development and implementation of health technology innovations, including AI, in theNorthern region.The research in ELSA-NN will focus on developing and mapping ELSA knowledge around three general concepts of importance for the development, monitoring and implementation of trustworthy and human-centric AI: availability, use,and performance. These concepts will be explored in two lines of research: 1) use case research investigating the use of different AI applications with different types of data in different decision-making contexts at different time periods duringthe life course, and 2) an exploration among stakeholders in the Northern region of needs, knowledge, (digital) health literacy, attitudes and values concerning the use of AI in decision-making for healthy living, working and ageing. Specificfocus will be on investigating low social economic status (SES) perspectives, since health disparities between high and low SES groups are growing world-wide, including in the Northern region and existing health inequalities may increase with theintroduction and use of innovative health technologies such as AI.ELSA-NN will be integrated within the AI hub Northern-Netherlands, the Health Technology Research & Innovation Cluster (HTRIC) and the Data Science Center in Health (DASH). They offer a solid base and infrastructure for the ELSA-NNconsortium, which will be extended with additional partners, especially patient/citizens, private, governmental and researchrepresentatives, to have a quadruple-helix consortium. ELSA-NN will be set-up as a learning health system in which much attention will be paid to dialogue, communication and education.
