From tokenism to empowerment: progressing patient and public involvement in healthcare improvement a narrative review
File(s)BMJ Qual Saf-2016-Ocloo-626-32.pdf (571.9 KB)
Published version
Author(s)
Ocloo, J
Matthews, R
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Background
There have been repeated calls to better involve patients and the public and to place them at the centre of healthcare. Serious clinical and service failings in the UK, and internationally, increase the urgency and importance of addressing this problem. Despite this supportive policy context, progress to achieve greater involvement is patchy and slow and often concentrated at the lowest levels of involvement.
Methods
A selective narrative literature search was guided by the authors’ broad expertise, covering a range of disciplines across health and social care, policy and research. Published systematic literature reviews were used to identify relevant authors and publications. Google and hand searches of journal articles and reference lists and reports augmented identification of recent evidence.
Results
Patients and the wider public can be involved at most stages of healthcare and this can have a number of benefits. Uncertainty persists about why and how to do involvement well and evaluate its impact, how to involve and support a diversity of individuals, and in ways that allow them to work in partnership to genuinely influence decision making. This exposes PPI to criticisms of exclusivity and tokenism.
Conclusions
Current models of PPI are too narrow and few organisations mention empowerment or address equality and diversity in their involvement strategies. These aspects of involvement should receive greater attention, as well as the adoption of models and frameworks that enable power and decision-making to be shared more equitably with patients and the public in designing, planning and co-producing healthcare.
There have been repeated calls to better involve patients and the public and to place them at the centre of healthcare. Serious clinical and service failings in the UK, and internationally, increase the urgency and importance of addressing this problem. Despite this supportive policy context, progress to achieve greater involvement is patchy and slow and often concentrated at the lowest levels of involvement.
Methods
A selective narrative literature search was guided by the authors’ broad expertise, covering a range of disciplines across health and social care, policy and research. Published systematic literature reviews were used to identify relevant authors and publications. Google and hand searches of journal articles and reference lists and reports augmented identification of recent evidence.
Results
Patients and the wider public can be involved at most stages of healthcare and this can have a number of benefits. Uncertainty persists about why and how to do involvement well and evaluate its impact, how to involve and support a diversity of individuals, and in ways that allow them to work in partnership to genuinely influence decision making. This exposes PPI to criticisms of exclusivity and tokenism.
Conclusions
Current models of PPI are too narrow and few organisations mention empowerment or address equality and diversity in their involvement strategies. These aspects of involvement should receive greater attention, as well as the adoption of models and frameworks that enable power and decision-making to be shared more equitably with patients and the public in designing, planning and co-producing healthcare.
Date Issued
2016-11-18
Date Acceptance
2016-02-29
Citation
BMJ Quality & Safety, 2016, 25 (8), pp.626-632
ISSN
2044-5423
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Start Page
626
End Page
632
Journal / Book Title
BMJ Quality & Safety
Volume
25
Issue
8
Copyright Statement
© 2016 The Authors. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Publication Status
Published