Tiago S Jesus1, Christina Papadimitriou2, Felicity A Bright3, Nicola M Kayes3, Cátia S Pinho4, Cheryl A Cott5. 1. Global Health and Tropical Medicine (GHTM) & WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Workforce Policy and Planning, Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine - NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal. Electronic address: jesus-ts@outlook.com. 2. School of Health Sciences, Oakland University, Rochester, MI. 3. Centre for Person Centred Research, School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand. 4. ISVOUGA - Superior Institute of Entre Douro e Vouga, Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal. 5. Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine; University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a cross-professional model framing the concept and practice of person-centered rehabilitation (PCR) in adult populations, based on a scoping review and thematic analysis of the literature. DATA SOURCES: Key databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), snowballing searches, and experts' consultation were the data sources for English-language empirical or conceptual articles published from January 2007-February 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers selected adult-based articles addressing at least 1 of the 6 categories of PCR-related content, a priori specified in the published review protocol. From 6527 unique references, 147 were finally included in the analysis. Of those, 26 were exclusively conceptual articles. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted textual data on what PCR entails conceptually or as a practice. No quality appraisals were performed as is typical in scoping reviews. DATA SYNTHESIS: A thematic analysis produced thematic categories that were combined into an emergent model (the PCR Model), which was reviewed by 5 external experts. PCR was framed as a way of thinking about and providing rehabilitation services "with" the person. PCR is embedded in rehabilitation structures and practice across 3 levels: (1) the person-professional dyad; (2) the microsystem level (typically an interprofessional team, involving significant others); and (3) a macrosystem level (organization within which rehabilitation is delivered). Thematic categories are articulated within each level, detailing both the conceptual and practice attributes of PCR. CONCLUSIONS: The PCR Model can inform both clinical and service organization practices. The PCR Model may benefit from further developments including obtaining wider stakeholders' input, determining relevance in different cultural and linguistic groups, and further operationalization and testing in implementation projects.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a cross-professional model framing the concept and practice of person-centered rehabilitation (PCR) in adult populations, based on a scoping review and thematic analysis of the literature. DATA SOURCES: Key databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health), snowballing searches, and experts' consultation were the data sources for English-language empirical or conceptual articles published from January 2007-February 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers selected adult-based articles addressing at least 1 of the 6 categories of PCR-related content, a priori specified in the published review protocol. From 6527 unique references, 147 were finally included in the analysis. Of those, 26 were exclusively conceptual articles. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted textual data on what PCR entails conceptually or as a practice. No quality appraisals were performed as is typical in scoping reviews. DATA SYNTHESIS: A thematic analysis produced thematic categories that were combined into an emergent model (the PCR Model), which was reviewed by 5 external experts. PCR was framed as a way of thinking about and providing rehabilitation services "with" the person. PCR is embedded in rehabilitation structures and practice across 3 levels: (1) the person-professional dyad; (2) the microsystem level (typically an interprofessional team, involving significant others); and (3) a macrosystem level (organization within which rehabilitation is delivered). Thematic categories are articulated within each level, detailing both the conceptual and practice attributes of PCR. CONCLUSIONS: The PCR Model can inform both clinical and service organization practices. The PCR Model may benefit from further developments including obtaining wider stakeholders' input, determining relevance in different cultural and linguistic groups, and further operationalization and testing in implementation projects.