ORCID Profile
0000-0002-0856-4025
Current Organisation
University of Aberdeen
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 28-07-2011
DOI: 10.1111/J.1365-2753.2011.01722.X
Abstract: Pay-for-performance schemes reward standardized professional behaviours associated with effective care. However, they neglect the significance of virtue and devalue and erode professional motivation based on virtue. Pay for training to cultivate virtue, and/or pay-for-virtue, may mitigate these dangers. Although virtue is typically considered its own reward, and the assessment of virtue is problematic, pay-for-virtue could involve (1) stringent checks on the appropriateness of the standardized care currently rewarded by pay-for-performance for in idual patients or (2) pay for indicators of virtue. These indicators could be based on virtues identified from a framework of universal virtues and through logical inferences from features of practice. It is possible that pay-for-virtue could ultimately strengthen health professionals' intrinsic motivation for good practice, but this and the broader effects of pay-for-virtue would need careful investigation.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-05-2010
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 02-12-2014
Abstract: Discussion of unanticipated problems in care with patients and their families (‘open disclosure’) is now widely advocated. Despite international efforts and the introduction of a range of policies and guidance to promote such discussions, the expectations of policy makers and patients are often not matched in practice. We consider some reasons for the persistence of shortfalls in the occurrence and quality of open disclosure. We draw on research conducted to investigate the implementation of a ‘ Being open’ policy in England, reflecting particularly on insights derived from interviews with health care professionals. Health care professionals were broadly supportive of the idea of open disclosure. Some expressed well-recognized concern about punishment and being blamed, but this did not appear to be the main driver of their communication practices. Their accounts of what happened around particular problems in health care indicated that they brought a complex range of considerations to bear on questions of whether and how these were discussed with patients and relatives. Guidance about open disclosure based on assessments of levels of harm to patients can complicate and perhaps distort health care professionals’ approaches, particularly when the extent and/or cause of harm was uncertain. Health care professionals who engage in open disclosure must be able to negotiate appropriate ways through complex and sensitive discussions. The responses of patients and relatives are not always predictable and even the best open disclosure practice may not resolve problems and concerns. Guidance, training and support for staff need to reflect these challenges.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 23-09-2011
Publisher: University of Buckingham Press
Date: 21-10-2020
Abstract: Positive claims about narrative approaches to healthcare suggest they could have many benefits, including supporting person-centred healthcare (PCH). Narrative approaches have also been criticised, however, on both theoretical and practical grounds. In this paper we draw on epistemological work on narrative and knowledge to develop a conception of narrative that responds to these concerns. We make a case for understanding narratives as accounts of events in which the way each event is described as influenced by the ways other events in the narrative are described. This view of narratives recognises that they can contribute knowledge of different kinds of connections between events: not just causal, and not just of patient’s perspectives. Additionally, narratives can add further epistemic value by suggesting potentially useful lines of inquiry. We take narrative approaches to healthcare to include clinicians considering both patients’ informational offerings and their own professional understandings as narratives. On this understanding, our account is able to overcome the major theoretical and practical criticisms that have been levelled against the use of narrative approaches in healthcare, and can help to explain why and how narrative approaches are consistent with PCH.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 06-03-2010
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 12-2016
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2017
DOI: 10.1016/J.PEC.2017.05.014
Abstract: Family caregivers are regularly involved in cancer consultations and treatment decision-making (DM). Yet there is limited conceptual description of caregiver influence/involvement in DM. To address this, an empirically-grounded conceptual framework of triadic DM (TRIO Framework) and corresponding graphical aid (TRIO Triangle) were developed. Jabareen's model for conceptual framework development informed multiple phases of development/validation, incorporation of empirical research and theory, and iterative revisions by an expert advisory group. Findings coalesced into six empirically-grounded conceptual insights: i) Caregiver influence over a decision is variable amongst different groups ii) Caregiver influence is variable within the one triad over time iii) Caregivers are involved in various ways in the wider DM process iv) DM is not only amongst three, but can occur among wider social networks v) Many factors may affect the form and extent of caregiver involvement in DM vi) Caregiver influence over, and involvement in, DM is linked to their everyday involvement in illness care/management. The TRIO Framework/Triangle may serve as a useful guide for future empirical, ethical and/or theoretical work. This Framework can deepen clinicians's and researcher's understanding of the erse and varying scope of caregiver involvement and influence in DM.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2011
DOI: 10.1016/J.PEC.2011.07.022
Abstract: To test the effect of three questions (what are my options? what are the benefits and harms? and how likely are these?), on information provided by physicians about treatment options. We used a cross-over trial using two unannounced standardized patients (SPs) simulating a presentation of mild-moderate depression. One SP was assigned the intervention role (asking the questions), the other the control role. An intervention and control SP visited each physician, order allocated randomly. The study was conducted in family practices in Sydney, Australia, during 2008-09. Data were obtained from consultation audio-recordings. Information about treatment options and patient involvement were analyzed using the Assessing Communication about Evidence and Patient Preferences (ACEPP) tool and the OPTION tool. Thirty-six SP visits were completed (18 intervention, 18 control). Scores were higher in intervention consultations than controls: ACEPP scores 21.4 vs. 16.6, p<0.001, difference 4.7 (95% CI 2.3-7.0) and OPTION scores 36 vs. 25, p=0.001, difference 11.5 (95% CI 5.1-17.8), indicating greater information provision and behavior supporting patient involvement. Asking these three questions improved information given by family physicians and increased physician facilitation of patient involvement. Practice implications. These questions can drive evidence-based practice, strengthen patient-physician communication, and improve safety and quality.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 17-10-2014
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2014.957416
Abstract: Many health care systems include programs that allow patients in exceptional circumstances to access medical interventions of as yet unproven benefit. In this article we consider the ethical justifications for-and demands on-these special access programs (SAPs). SAPs have a compassionate basis: They give patients with limited options the opportunity to try interventions that are not yet approved by standard regulatory processes. But while they signal that health care systems can and will respond to in idual suffering, SAPs have several disadvantages, including the potential to undermine regulatory and knowledge-generation structures that constitute significant public goods. The "balance" between these considerations depends in part on how broadly SAPs are used, but also on whether SAPs can be made to contribute to the generation of knowledge about the effects of health interventions. We argue that patients should usually be required to contribute outcome data while using SAPs.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 07-2011
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 21-04-2014
DOI: 10.1111/BIRT.12109
Abstract: Birth plans are written preferences for labor and birth which women prepare in advance. Most studies have examined them as a novel intervention or "outside" formal care provision. This study considered use of a standard birth plan section within a national, woman-held maternity record. Exploratory qualitative interviews were conducted with women (42) and maternity service staff (24) in northeast Scotland. Data were analyzed thematically. Staff and women were generally positive about the provision of the birth plan section within the record. Perceived benefits included the opportunity to highlight preferences, enhance communication, stimulate discussions, and address anxieties. However, not all women experienced these benefits or understood the birth plan's purpose. Some were unaware of the opportunity to complete it or could not access the support they needed from staff to discuss or be confident about their options. Some were reluctant to plan too much. Staff recognized the need to support women with birth plan completion but noted practical challenges to this. A supportive antenatal opportunity to allow discussion of options may be needed to realize the potential benefits of routine inclusion of birth plans in maternity notes.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 24-06-2022
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 21-09-2012
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 2018
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 08-03-2016
DOI: 10.1093/PHE/PHW005
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-05-2019
DOI: 10.1007/S10728-019-00369-7
Abstract: Many healthcare practices expose people to risks of harmful outcomes. However, the major theories of moral philosophy struggle to assess whether, when and why it is ethically justifiable to expose in iduals to risks, as opposed to actually harming them. Sven Ove Hansson has proposed an approach to the ethical assessment of risk imposition that encourages attention to factors including questions of justice in the distribution of advantage and risk, people's acceptance or otherwise of risks, and the scope in iduals have to influence the practices that generate risk. This paper investigates the ethical justifiability of preventive healthcare practices that expose people to risks including overdiagnosis. We applied Hansson's framework to three such practices: an 'ideal' breast screening service, a commercial personal genome testing service, and a guideline that lowers the diagnostic threshold for hypertension. The framework was challenging to apply, not least because healthcare has unclear boundaries and involves highly complex practices. Nonetheless, the framework encouraged attention to issues that would be widely recognised as morally pertinent. Our assessment supports the view that at least some preventive healthcare practices that impose risks including that of overdiagnosis are not ethically justifiable. Further work is however needed to develop and/or test refined assessment criteria and guidance for applying them.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 04-2012
DOI: 10.1258/JHSRP.2011.011029
Abstract: Patients' experiences are often treated as health care quality indicators. Our aim was to identify the range of experiences of health care delivery that matter to patients and to produce a conceptual map to facilitate consideration of why they matter. Broad-based review and critical interpretive synthesis of research literature on patients' perspectives of health care delivery. We recorded experiences reported by a erse range of patients on ‘concept cards’, considered why they were important, and explored various ways of organizing them, including internationally recognized health care quality frameworks. We developed a conceptual map that we refined with feedback from stakeholders. Patients identify many health care experiences as important. Existing health care quality frameworks do not cover them all. Our conceptual map presents a rich array of experiences, including health care relationships (beyond communication) and their implications for people's valued capabilities (e.g. to feel respected, contribute to their care, experience reciprocity). It is organized to reflect our synthesis argument, which links health care delivery to what people are enabled (or not) to feel, be and do. The map highlights the broad implications of the social dynamics of health care delivery. Experiences are labelled from a patient's perspective, rendering the importance of responsiveness to in iduals axiomatic. Our conceptual map identifies and helps explain the importance of erse experiences of health care delivery. It challenges and helps policy-makers, service providers and researchers to attend to the range of experiences that matter, and to take seriously the need for responsiveness to in iduals.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2010
DOI: 10.1080/08870440903194015
Abstract: In interview studies, s le size is often justified by interviewing participants until reaching 'data saturation'. However, there is no agreed method of establishing this. We propose principles for deciding saturation in theory-based interview studies (where conceptual categories are pre-established by existing theory). First, specify a minimum s le size for initial analysis (initial analysis s le). Second, specify how many more interviews will be conducted without new ideas emerging (stopping criterion). We demonstrate these principles in two studies, based on the theory of planned behaviour, designed to identify three belief categories (Behavioural, Normative and Control), using an initial analysis s le of 10 and stopping criterion of 3. Study 1 (retrospective analysis of existing data) identified 84 shared beliefs of 14 general medical practitioners about managing patients with sore throat without prescribing antibiotics. The criterion for saturation was achieved for Normative beliefs but not for other beliefs or studywise saturation. In Study 2 (prospective analysis), 17 relatives of people with Paget's disease of the bone reported 44 shared beliefs about taking genetic testing. Studywise data saturation was achieved at interview 17. We propose specification of these principles for reporting data saturation in theory-based interview studies. The principles may be adaptable for other types of studies.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 14-09-2015
DOI: 10.1111/HEX.12409
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-10-2003
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2014
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 06-2018
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 26-08-2006
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 02-2013
DOI: 10.1093/JNCI/DJS649
Abstract: Cancer screening is widely practiced and participation is promoted by various social, technical, and commercial drivers, but there are growing concerns about the emerging harms, risks, and costs of cancer screening. Deliberative democracy methods engage citizens in dialogue on substantial and complex problems: especially when evidence and values are important and people need time to understand and consider the relevant issues. Information derived from such deliberations can provide important guidance to cancer screening policies: citizens' values are made explicit, revealing what really matters to people and why. Policy makers can see what informed, rather than uninformed, citizens would decide on the provision of services and information on cancer screening. Caveats can be elicited to guide changes to existing policies and practices. Policies that take account of citizens' opinions through a deliberative democracy process can be considered more legitimate, justifiable, and feasible than those that don't.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 08-06-2016
DOI: 10.1007/S10728-016-0323-5
Abstract: Patient or public involvement (PPI) in health research is increasingly expected as a matter of policy. In theory, PPI can contribute both to the epistemic aims intrinsic to research (generating knowledge), and to extrinsically valued features of research such as social inclusion and transparency. In practice, the aims of PPI have not always been clear, although there has been a tendency to encourage the involvement of so-called ordinary people who are regarded as representative of an assumed patient perspective. In this paper we focus on the epistemic potential of PPI, using theoretical work in epistemology to develop a nuanced account of patients' experiential knowledge and how this might contribute directly to conceptual development, hypothesis generation and data interpretation. We also consider how some features of health research pose barriers to this kind of epistemic contribution. Drawing on Miranda Fricker's idea of testimonial injustice, we explore how disciplinary indicators of credibility in clinical and academic health research contexts might be wrongly applied to those involved in PPI, undermining their potential to contribute. Finally we argue for a range of strategies to maximize opportunities for patients to engage with research teams and make epistemologically significant contributions to research.
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 21-04-2016
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 19-10-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 29-05-2008
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2008
DOI: 10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2007.09.001
Abstract: Patient involvement in decision-making is widely regarded as an important feature of good-quality healthcare. Policy-makers have been particularly concerned to ensure that patients are informed about and enabled to choose between relevant treatment options, but it is not clear how patients understand and value involvement. We investigated the meaning of involvement in treatment decision-making for people with diabetes. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 people aged between 20 and 79 who had type 1 or type 2 diabetes selected from 4 multi-practitioner outpatient clinics in the Gr ian area of Scotland. We used several strategies to probe their understandings of involvement, including a discussion of how they would respond to a question about involvement in treatment decisions that appears on the National Patient Survey used to monitor the quality of healthcare in England. Participants associated involvement in decision-making with a number of features relating to the ethos and feel of healthcare encounters (welcoming respectful facilitative of patients' contributions and non-judgmental) communication about health problems (practitioners attending to patients' views and patients feeling listened to practitioners giving clear explanations based on their professional knowledge and patients understanding these) and communication about treatments (practitioners explaining treatment rationales in ways that patients understand and enabling patients to feel they have a say). Our findings have implications for practical attempts to involve patients in decisions about their care and for the conceptualisation and assessment of patient involvement. They suggest that practitioners who aspire to facilitate patient involvement should attend to the ethos they foster in consultations and the way they discuss problems as well as to the provision of information about treatment options and the scope patients have to influence decisions. Models and taxonomies of patient involvement in decision-making need to be developed to accommodate both problem-solving phases and the relational and subjective dimensions of involvement.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2015
DOI: 10.1016/J.PUHE.2015.03.007
Abstract: 'Nanny-state' accusations can function as powerful rhetorical weapons against interventions intended to promote public health. Public health advocates often lack effective rebuttals to these criticisms. Nanny-state accusations are largely accusations of paternalism. They conjure up emotive concern about undue governmental interference undermining peoples' autonomy. But autonomy can be understood in various ways. We outline three main conceptions of autonomy, argue that these that can underpin three different conceptions of paternalism, and consider implications for responses to nanny-state accusations and the assessment of public health interventions. Detailed conceptual analysis. The conceptions of paternalism implicit in nanny-state accusations generally depend on libertarian conceptions of autonomy. These reflect unrealistic views of personal independence and do not discriminate sufficiently between trivial and important freedoms. Decisional conceptions of paternalism, like their underlying decisional conceptions of autonomy, have limited applicability in public health contexts. Relational conceptions of paternalism incorporate relational conceptions of autonomy, so recognize that personal autonomy depends on socially shaped skills, self-identities and self-evaluations as well as externally structured opportunities. They encourage attention to the various ways that social interactions and relationships, including disrespect, stigmatization and oppression, can undermine potential for autonomy. While nanny-state accusations target any interference with negative freedom, however trivial, relational conceptions direct concerns to those infringements of negative freedom, or absences of positive freedom, serious enough to undermine self-determination, self-governance and/or self-authorization. Relational conceptions of autonomy and paternalism offer public health policymakers and practitioners a means for rebutting nanny-state accusations, and can support more nuanced and more appropriately demanding appraisals of public health interventions.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 22-06-2020
DOI: 10.1136/MEDETHICS-2020-106460
Abstract: Throughout March and April 2020, debate raged about how best to allocate limited intensive care unit (ICU) resources in the face of a growing COVID-19 pandemic. The debate was dominated by utility-based arguments for saving the most lives or life-years. These arguments were tempered by equity-based concerns that triage based solely on prognosis would exacerbate existing health inequities, leaving disadvantaged patients worse off. Central to this debate was the assumption that ICU admission is a valuable but scarce resource in the pandemic context. In this paper, we argue that the concern about achieving equity in ICU triage is problematic for two reasons. First, ICU can be futile and prolong or exacerbate suffering rather than ameliorate it. This may be especially true in patients with COVID-19 with emerging data showing that most who receive access to a ventilator will still die. There is no value in admitting patients with poor prognostic indicators to ICU to meet an equity target when intensive critical care is contrary to their best interests. Second, the focus on ICU admission shifts focus away from important aspects of COVID-19 care where there is greater opportunity for mitigating suffering and enhancing equitable care. We propose that the focus on equity concerns during the pandemic should broaden to include providing all people who need it with access to the highest possible standard of end-of-life care. This requires attention to culturally safe care in the following interlinked areas: palliative care, communication and decision support and advanced care planning.
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Date: 22-04-2003
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Date: 21-07-2003
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 24-06-2022
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-01-2003
Abstract: The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 gave states the option to withdraw Medicaid coverage of nonemergency care from most legal immigrants. Our goal was to assess the effect of PRWORA on hospital uncompensated care in the United States. We collected the following state-level data for the period from 1994 through 1999: foreign-born, noncitizen population and health uninsurance rates (US Census Current Population Survey) percentage of teaching hospitals (American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals) and each state's decision whether to implement the PRWORA Medicaid bar for legal permanent residents or to continue offering nonemergency Medicaid coverage using state-only funds (Urban Institute). We modeled uncompensated care expenditures by state (also from the Annual Survey of Hospitals) in both univariate and multivariable regression analyses. When measured at the state level, there was no significant relationship between uncompensated care expenditures and states' percentage of noncitizen immigrants. Uninsurance rates were the only significant factor in predicting uncompensated hospital care expenditures by state. Reducing the number of uninsured patients would most surely reduce hospital expenditures for uncompensated care. However, data limitations h ered our efforts to obtain a monetary estimate of hospitals' financial losses due specifically to the immigrant eligibility changes in PRWORA. Quantifying the impact of these provisions on hospitals will require better data sources.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 13-09-2017
DOI: 10.1111/BIOE.12383
Abstract: Current practices of identifying and treating small indolent thyroid cancers constitute an important but in some ways unusual form of overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis refers to diagnoses that generally harm rather than benefit patients, primarily because the diagnosed condition is not a harmful form of disease. Patients who are overdiagnosed with thyroid cancer are harmed by the psycho-social impact of a cancer diagnosis, as well as treatment interventions such partial or total thyroidectomy, lifelong thyroid replacement hormone, monitoring, surgical complications and other side effects. These harms seem to outweigh any putative benefit of knowing about a cancer that would not have caused problems if left undiscovered. In addition to harms to patients, thyroid cancer overdiagnosis leads to significant opportunity costs at a societal level, due to costs of diagnosis and treatment. Unlike many other overdiagnosed cancers, accurate risk stratification is possible with thyroid cancer. At the in idual patient level, use of this risk information might support informed choice and/or shared decision-making, as mandated by clinical ethics frameworks. And this approach might, to some extent, help to reduce rates of diagnosis and intervention. In practice, however, it is unlikely to stem the rising incidence and associated harms and costs of overdiagnosed thyroid cancer, especially in situations where health professionals have conflicts of interest. We argue in this article that thyroid cancer overdiagnosis may be usefully understood as a public health problem, and that some public health approaches will be readily justifiable and are more likely to be effective in minimising its harms.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 17-10-2014
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Vikki Entwistle.