Julian C Hughes1, Claire Bamford, Carl May. 1. Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust and the Institute for Ageing and Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. j.c.hughes@ncl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For a variety of sociological reasons, different types of centredness have become important in health and social care. In trying to characterize one type of centredness, we were led to consider, at a conceptual level, the importance of the notion of centredness in general and the reasons for there being different types of centeredness. METHOD: We searched the literature for papers on client-, family-, patient-, person- and relationship- centred care. We identified reviews or papers that defined or discussed the notions at a conceptual level. The reviews and papers were analyzed as text transcripts. RESULTS: We identified 10 themes that were common to all the types of centredness. At a conceptual level we could not identify thematic differences between the types of centredness. These findings were subjected to a philosophical critique using ideas derived from Wittgenstein. CONCLUSION: Different types of centredness are required in different contexts. The differences are justified by their practical utility. The unifying themes of centredness, however, reflect a movement in favour of increasing the social, psychological, cultural and ethical sensitivity of our human encounters.
BACKGROUND: For a variety of sociological reasons, different types of centredness have become important in health and social care. In trying to characterize one type of centredness, we were led to consider, at a conceptual level, the importance of the notion of centredness in general and the reasons for there being different types of centeredness. METHOD: We searched the literature for papers on client-, family-, patient-, person- and relationship- centred care. We identified reviews or papers that defined or discussed the notions at a conceptual level. The reviews and papers were analyzed as text transcripts. RESULTS: We identified 10 themes that were common to all the types of centredness. At a conceptual level we could not identify thematic differences between the types of centredness. These findings were subjected to a philosophical critique using ideas derived from Wittgenstein. CONCLUSION: Different types of centredness are required in different contexts. The differences are justified by their practical utility. The unifying themes of centredness, however, reflect a movement in favour of increasing the social, psychological, cultural and ethical sensitivity of our human encounters.
Authors: Renate C Siebes; Marjolijin Ketelaar; Lex Wijnroks; Petra E M van Schie; Bianca J G Nijhuis; Adri Vermeer; Jan Willem Gorter Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Geraldine M Leydon; Christopher F Dowrick; Anita S McBride; Hana J Burgess; Amanda C Howe; Pamela D Clarke; Susan P Maisey; Tony Kendrick Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Monique Lhussier; Simon Eaton; Natalie Forster; Mathew Thomas; Sue Roberts; Susan M Carr Journal: Health Expect Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Mark Wilberforce; David Challis; Linda Davies; Michael P Kelly; Chris Roberts; Nik Loynes Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 3.921