12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Developing user personas to capture intersecting dimensions of disadvantage in older patients who are marginalised: a qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Remote and digital services must be equitable, but some patients have difficulty using these services. Designing measures to overcome digital disparities can be challenging for practices. Personas (fictional cases) are a potentially useful tool in this regard.

          Aim

          To develop and test a set of personas to reflect the lived experiences and challenges that older people who are disadvantaged face when navigating remote and digital primary care services.

          Design and setting

          Qualitative study of digital disparities in NHS community health services offering video appointments.

          Method

          Following familiarisation visits and interviews with service providers, 17 older people with multiple markers of disadvantage (limited English, health conditions, and poverty) were recruited and interviewed using narrative prompts. Data were analysed using an intersectionality lens, underpinned by sociological theory. Combining data across all participant interviews, we produced personas and refined these following focus groups involving health professionals, patients, and advocates ( n = 12).

          Results

          Digital services create significant challenges for older patients with limited economic, social, and linguistic resources and low digital, health, or system literacy. Four contrasting personas were produced, capturing the variety and complexity of how dimensions of disadvantage intersected and influenced identity and actions. The personas illustrate important themes including experience of racism and discrimination, disorientation, discontinuity, limited presence, weak relationships, loss of agency, and mistrust of services and providers.

          Conclusion

          Personas can illuminate the multiple and intersecting dimensions of disadvantage in patient populations who are marginalised and may prove useful when designing or redesigning digital primary care services. Adopting an intersectional lens may help practices address digital disparities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Contribution of primary care to health systems and health.

          Evidence of the health-promoting influence of primary care has been accumulating ever since researchers have been able to distinguish primary care from other aspects of the health services delivery system. This evidence shows that primary care helps prevent illness and death, regardless of whether the care is characterized by supply of primary care physicians, a relationship with a source of primary care, or the receipt of important features of primary care. The evidence also shows that primary care (in contrast to specialty care) is associated with a more equitable distribution of health in populations, a finding that holds in both cross-national and within-national studies. The means by which primary care improves health have been identified, thus suggesting ways to improve overall health and reduce differences in health across major population subgroups.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Is Racism a Fundamental Cause of Inequalities in Health?

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Continuity of care with doctors—a matter of life and death? A systematic review of continuity of care and mortality

              Objective Continuity of care is a long-standing feature of healthcare, especially of general practice. It is associated with increased patient satisfaction, increased take-up of health promotion, greater adherence to medical advice and decreased use of hospital services. This review aims to examine whether there is a relationship between the receipt of continuity of doctor care and mortality. Design Systematic review without meta-analysis. Data sources MEDLINE, Embase and the Web of Science, from 1996 to 2017. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Peer-reviewed primary research articles, published in English which reported measured continuity of care received by patients from any kind of doctor, in any setting, in any country, related to measured mortality of those patients. Results Of the 726 articles identified in searches, 22 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The studies were all cohort or cross-sectional and most adjusted for multiple potential confounding factors. These studies came from nine countries with very different cultures and health systems. We found such heterogeneity of continuity and mortality measurement methods and time frames that it was not possible to combine the results of studies. However, 18 (81.8%) high-quality studies reported statistically significant reductions in mortality, with increased continuity of care. 16 of these were with all-cause mortality. Three others showed no association and one demonstrated mixed results. These significant protective effects occurred with both generalist and specialist doctors. Conclusions This first systematic review reveals that increased continuity of care by doctors is associated with lower mortality rates. Although all the evidence is observational, patients across cultural boundaries appear to benefit from continuity of care with both generalist and specialist doctors. Many of these articles called for continuity to be given a higher priority in healthcare planning. Despite substantial, successive, technical advances in medicine, interpersonal factors remain important. PROSPERO registration number CRD42016042091.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: DPhil candidate
                Role: Senior health services researcher
                Role: Emergency physician candidate
                Role: Senior researcher
                Role: Associate professor of healthcare management
                Role: Professor of primary care health sciences
                Journal
                Br J Gen Pract
                Br J Gen Pract
                bjgp
                bjgp
                The British Journal of General Practice
                Royal College of General Practitioners
                0960-1643
                1478-5242
                April 2024
                05 March 2024
                05 March 2024
                : 74
                : 741
                : e250-e257
                Affiliations
                The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute research fellow;
                Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
                School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, US.
                Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
                School of Business, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
                Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
                Author notes
                CORRESPONDENCE Laiba Husain Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK. Email: laiba.husain@ 123456phc.ox.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9889-0889
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2538-8366
                http://orcid.org/0009-0007-5186-4430
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7701-4783
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2930-1125
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2369-8088
                Article
                10.3399/BJGP.2023.0412
                10947364
                38242714
                23200a35-d81c-4103-8a8e-ea219a5ff7be
                © The Authors

                This article is Open Access: CC BY 4.0 licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 14 August 2023
                : 02 November 2023
                : 11 December 2023
                Categories
                Research

                aged,digital disparities,digital equity,digital healthcare,focus groups,primary care

                Comments

                Comment on this article