Reference : Chronic illness as a stimulus to eupraxia in patient-centred medicine: The example of...
Scientific journals : Article
Social & behavioral sciences, psychology : Animal psychology, ethology & psychobiology
Social & behavioral sciences, psychology : Neurosciences & behavior
Social & behavioral sciences, psychology : Theoretical & cognitive psychology
Social & behavioral sciences, psychology : Treatment & clinical psychology
Human health sciences : Psychiatry
Chronic illness as a stimulus to eupraxia in patient-centred medicine: The example of long-term diagnosis with HIV
Whitaker, Rupert [> >]
Vögele, Claus mailto [University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Language and Literature, Humanities, Arts and Education (FLSHASE) > Integrative Research Unit: Social and Individual Development (INSIDE) >]
McSherry, Kevin [> >]
Goldstein, Ellen [> >]
Chronic Illness
SAGE Publications
Yes (verified by ORBilu)
[en] Best practice ; Patient-centred medicine ; Chronic illness ; Personalised treatment ; Clinical design ; Eupraxia
[en] The biopsychosocial challenges of living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have changed over time and they dictate the need for relevant medical services. The meaning of an HIV diagnosis has moved from a terminal to a manageable condition with the development of antiretrovirals, bringing profound changes to the experience of living with HIV and the meaning and use of diagnostic labels. Six biological stage-related categories in the literature of psychological medicine of HIV are critiqued. Long-term HIV highlights the inadequacy of physician-centred, acute-care medicine in chronic illness and its exclusion of preventive, psychological and rehabilitative modalities. ‘Eupraxia’ is presented as a conceptual framework for chronic care medicine, referring to best practice, wellbeing, best interests, and (public) welfare, through facilitated but collaborative approaches. A public-centred service model is proposed, using idiographic assessment and treatment by clinicians as patient delegates (proxies), monitoring
joined-up care, providing group-based biopsychosocial treatment, facilitating autonomous and self-managing behaviour by the public, removing professional and practice hierarchies, and implementing real-time clinical and managerial accountability with public ownership and involvement. This model is superior in its health- and cost-effectiveness but can only work within a nationalized system that focuses equally on standardized outcomes and evidential and personalized health outcomes.
Researchers ; Professionals ; Students

File(s) associated to this reference

Fulltext file(s):

Limited access
Whitaker2006.pdfPublisher postprint100.76 kBRequest a copy

Bookmark and Share SFX Query

All documents in ORBilu are protected by a user license.