Who is at the centre of what? A scoping review of the conceptualisation of 'centredness' in healthcare

Elizabeth Ann Sturgiss; Annette Peart; Lauralie Richard; Lauren Ball; Liesbeth Hunik; Tze Lin Chai; Steven Lau; Danny Vadasz; Grant Russell; Moira Stewart

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059400

Who is at the centre of what? A scoping review of the conceptualisation of 'centredness' in healthcare

BMJ Open. 2022 May 2;12(5):e059400. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059400.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia liz.sturgiss@monash.edu.
² Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
³ Department of General Practice and Rural Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
⁴ Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University,School of Public Health, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
⁵ Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
⁶ School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
⁷ Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
⁸ Health Issues Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
⁹ Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
¹⁰ Department of Family Medicine, Centre for Studies in Family Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to identify the core elements of centredness in healthcare literature. Our overall research question is: How has centredness been represented within the health literature published between 1990 and 2019?

Methods: A scoping review across five databases (Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase (Ovid) and Scopus; August 2019) to identify all peer-reviewed literature published since 1990 that focused on the concept of centredness in any healthcare discipline or setting. Screening occurred in duplicate by a multidisciplinary, multinational team. The team met regularly to iteratively develop and refine a coding template that was used in analysis and discuss the interpretations of centredness reported in the literature.

Results: A total of 23 006 title and abstracts, and 499 full-text articles were screened. A total of 159 articles were included in the review. Most articles were from the USA, and nursing was the disciplinary perspective most represented. We identified nine elements of centredness: Sharing power; Sharing responsibility; Therapeutic relationship/bond/alliance; Patient as a person; Biopsychosocial; Provider as a person; Co-ordinated care; Access; Continuity of care. There was little variation in the concept of centredness no matter the preceding word (eg, patient-/person-/client-), healthcare setting or disciplinary lens. Improving health outcomes was the most common justification for pursuing centredness as a concept, and respect was the predominant driving value of the research efforts. The patient perspective was rarely included in the papers (15% of papers).

Conclusions: Centredness is consistently conceptualised, regardless of the preceding word, disciplinary lens or nation of origin. Further research should focus on centring the patient perspective and prioritise research that considers more diverse cultural perspectives.

Keywords: EDUCATION & TRAINING (see Medical Education & Training); ETHICS (see Medical Ethics); PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; PRIMARY CARE; Quality in health care.

Publication types

Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Concept Formation*
Delivery of Health Care
Health Facilities
Humans
Patient-Centered Care* / methods