Recognition of physiotherapists' expertise in Parkinson's disease

Multidisciplinary Care to Optimize Functional Mobility in Parkinson Disease

This review elaborates on multidisciplinary care for persons living with Parkinson disease by using gait and balance impairments as an example of a treatable target that typically necessitates an integrated approach by a range of different and complementary professional disciplines. Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health model as a framework, the authors discuss the assessment and multidisciplinary management of reduced functional mobility due to gait and balance impairments. By doing so, they highlight the complex interplay between motor and nonmotor symptoms, and their influence on rehabilitation. They outline how multidisciplinary care for Parkinson disease can be organized.

Are patients' preferences regarding the place of treatment heard and addressed at the point of referral: an exploratory study based on observations of GP-patient consultations

Background

Today, in several north-western European countries, patients are encouraged to choose, actively, a healthcare provider. However, patients often visit the provider that is recommended by their general practitioner (GP). The introduction of patient choice requires GPs to support patients to be involved, actively, in the choice of a healthcare provider. We aim to investigate whether policy on patient choice is reflected in practice, i.e. what the role of the patient is in their choices of healthcare providers at the point of referral and to what extent GPs’ and patients’ healthcare paths influence the role that patients play in the referral decision.

Methods

In 2007–2008, we videotaped Dutch GP-patient consultations. For this study, we selected, at random, 72 videotaped consultations between 72 patients and 39 GPs in which the patient was referred to a healthcare provider. These were analysed using an observation protocol developed by the researchers.

Results

The majority of the patients had little or no input into the choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. Their GPs did not support them in actively choosing a provider and the patients often agreed with the provider that the GP proposed. Patients who were referred for diagnostic purposes seem to have had even less input into their choice of a provider than patients who were referred for treatment.

Conclusions

We found that the GP chooses a healthcare provider on behalf of the patient in most consultations, even though policy on patient choice expects from patients that they choose, actively, a provider. On the one hand, this could indicate that the policy needs adjustments. On the other hand, adjustments may be needed to practice. For instance, GPs could help patients to make an active choice of provider. However, certain patients prefer to let their GP decide as their agent. Even then, GPs need to know patients’ preferences, because in a principal-agent relationship, it is necessary that the agent is fully informed about the principal’s preferences.