Disease: An ill-founded concept at odds with the principle of patient-centred medicine

BACKGROUND

Despite the at least decades long record of philosophical recognition and interest, the intricacy of the deceptively familiar appearing concepts of 'disease', 'disorder', 'disability', and so forth, has only recently begun showing itself with clarity in the popular discourse wherein its newly emerging prominence stems from the liberties and restrictions contingent upon it. Whether a person is deemed to be afflicted by a disease or a disorder governs their ability to access health care, be it free at the point of use or provided by an insurer; it also influences the treatment of individuals by the judicial system and employers; it even affects one's own perception of self.

AIMS

All existing philosophical definitions of disease struggle with coherency, causing much confusion and strife, and leading to inconsistencies in real-world practice. Hence, there is a real need for an alternative.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the present article I analyse the variety of contemporary views of disease, showing them all to be inadequate and lacking in firm philosophical foundations, and failing to meet the desideratum of patient-driven care.

RESULTS

Illuminated by the insights emanating from the said analysis, I introduce a novel approach with firm ethical foundations, which foundations are rooted in sentience, that is the subjective experience of sentient beings.

DISCUSSION

I argue that the notion of disease is at best superfluous, and likely even harmful in the provision of compassionate and patient-centred care.

CONCLUSION

Using a series of presently contentious cases illustrate the power of the proposed framework which is capable of providing actionable and humane solutions to problems that leave the current theories confounded.

Habits and Routines of Adults in Early Recovery From Substance Use Disorder: Clinical and Research Implications From a Mixed Methodology Exploratory Study

The purpose of this exploratory, non-experimental mixed methods study was to analyze the habits and routines of adults in early recovery (>3 months) from substance use disorder (SUD). Participants (N = 14) were recruited from an intensive outpatient treatment (IOP) program for substance use disorders. Data collection consisted of a demographic survey, a researcher developed Daily Occupational Questionnaire (DOQ), and follow-up semi-structured interviews with 5 randomly selected participants. Quantitative results indicate rest as the most frequently engaged in activity on the most busy (31.0%) and least busy day (36.6%). There was no significant difference, t(13) = 0.117, P = .909, between newly established activities on the most busy and least busy day. Qualitative themes included 1. The most difficult time of day is often related to patterns of unused time. 2. When there is a lack of structure or unoccupied time, they return to their previously established positive supports. 3. There is a need for consistency and structure for developing anticipated/perceived routines. Implications for all healthcare and clinical providers working with this population, as well as research suggestions, are outlined.

Standardized routine outcome measurement: pot holes in the road to recovery

Routine 'outcome measurement' is currently being introduced across Australian mental health services. This paper asserts that routine standardized outcome measurement in its current form can only provide a crude and narrow lens through which to witness recovery. It has only a limited capacity to capture the richness of people's recovery journeys or provide information that can usefully inform care. Indeed, in its implementation nurses may be required to collude in practices or account for practice in ways which run counter to the personal recovery paradigm. Nurses should view a focus on outcomes as an opportunity for critical reflection as well as to seek ways to account for recovery stories in meaningful ways.