Through patients and professionals representations on patient partnership of care: the exploration of an ambiguous consensus – Preliminary results

Background: Patient engagement in health care system has been regarded as a lever for the general improvement of the health system. Many models illustrate and participate in this change. One of them proposes a patient-partnership, challenging the whole health system, from direct care to policy making. In a context where the Belgian health system is put into question, the relevance of patient participation has to be challenged. This exploratory study is aimed at exploring the representations, experiences and expectations towards these models. Through this contribution, we will highlight the understanding of a partnership in health for patients and professionals.
<br />
<br />Methods: As part of a larger Interreg research project, a qualitative approach has permitted an in-depth comprehension of patients and hospital professionals representation toward the partnership model. A purposive sample of thirty patients, suffering from cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases, has been met in six focus groups. Thirty professionals, nurses and specialist physician in charge of chronic patients, have taken part in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to organise the data.
<br />
<br />Results: Patients and professionals share common basis for partnership, perceiving it as positive and, in some way, already happening. Both patients and professionals mention, among other things, the importance of common language, listening skills and team work. Beyond these discourses, some divergences appear when considering what partnership could mean in practice. As an example, information sharing is a key debate for the actors, who don’t agree about what should be shared, how or with whom. Furthermore, if patients and professionals easily identify what a partnership should be in direct care, they struggle to conceive one at other levels.
<br />
<br />Conclusions: This analysis urges the health actors to face their divergence of opinions about interdisciplinarity, knowledge, and the sharing of information. These results constitute an initial trigger for the development of grounded interventions.