Clinician Perceptions of Family-Centered Care in Pediatric and Congenital Heart Settings.

Importance: Family-centered care recognizes families as central to child health and well-being and prioritizes clinician collaboration with families to ensure optimal pediatric care and outcomes. Clinician interpersonal sensitivity and communication skills are key to this approach. Objective: To examine perceptions of and factors associated with family-centered care among clinicians working in pediatric and congenital heart care. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, participants from diverse clinical disciplines (pediatric cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, nursing, anesthesia, neonatology, intensive care, psychology, and others), completed an online survey between June 2020 and February 2021. Participants included physicians, surgeons, nurses, and allied and mental health professionals at an Australian quaternary pediatric hospital network. Statistical analysis was performed from August 2022 to June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Family-centered care across 4 domains (showing interpersonal sensitivity, treating people respectfully, providing general information, and communicating specific information) was measured using the validated Measure of Processes of Care for Service Providers. Clinician burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment), confidence responding to families' psychosocial needs, and psychological, clinical role, and sociodemographic factors were also assessed. Informed by theory, hierarchical linear regression was used to identify factors associated with family-centered care. Results: There were 212 clinicians (177 women [84.3%]; 153 nurses [72.2%], 32 physicians [15.1%], 22 allied and mental health professionals [10.4%], 5 surgeons [2.3%]; 170 [80.2%] aged 20-49 years) who participated (55% response rate). Of the 4 family-centered care domains, scores for treating people respectfully were highest and associated with greater clinician confidence responding to families' psychosocial needs (effect size [ß], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.72]; P < .001), lower depersonalization (ß, 0.04 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01]; P = .02), and a greater sense of personal accomplishment at work (ß, 0.02 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.04]; P = 0.04). Greater interpersonal sensitivity was associated with greater confidence responding to families' psychosocial needs (ß, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.97]; P < .001), a greater sense of personal accomplishment at work (ß, 0.03 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.05]; P = .04), and lower use of approach-based coping, such as problem-solving (ß, 0.37 [95% CI, -0.71 to -0.02]; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, burnout and confidence responding to families' psychosocial needs were associated with clinicians' perceptions of family-centered care. These findings suggest that targeted interventions to address these factors may benefit clinicians and also potentially strengthen the practice of family-centered care in pediatric and congenital heart settings.

The Chronic Wound-Related Pain Model: Holistic Assessment and Person-Centered Treatment.

Chronic wound-related pain is a complex biopsychosocial experience that is experienced spontaneously at rest and exacerbated during activities. Tissue debridement, trauma at dressing change, increased bioburden or infection, exposure of periwound skin to moisture, and related treatment can modulate chronic wound-related pain. Clinicians should consider multimodal and multidisciplinary management approach that take into account the biology, emotions, cognitive thinking, social environment, and other personal determinants of pain. Unresolved pain can have a significant impact on wound healing, patients' adherence to treatment, and individual's quality of life.

Are the content and usability of a new direct observation tool adequate for assessing competency in delivering person-centred care: a think-aloud study with patients and healthcare professionals in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the content and usability of a new direct observation tool for assessing competency in delivering person-centred care based on the Gothenburg Centre for Person-Centred Care (gPCC) framework. DESIGN: This is a qualitative study using think-aloud techniques and retrospective probing interviews and analyzed using deductive content analysis. SETTING: Sessions were conducted remotely via Zoom with participants in their homes or offices. PARTICIPANTS: 11 participants with lengthy experience of receiving, delivering and/or implementing gPCC were recruited using purposeful sampling and selected to represent a broad variety of stakeholders and potential end-users. RESULTS: Participants generally considered the content of the four main domains of the tool, that is, person-centred care activities, clinician manner, clinician skills and person-centred care goals, to be comprehensive and relevant for assessing person-centred care in general and gPCC in particular. Some participants pointed to the need to expand person-centred care activities to better reflect the emphasis on eliciting patient resources/capabilities and psychosocial needs in the gPCC framework. Think-aloud analyses revealed some usability issues primarily regarding difficulties or uncertainties in understanding several words and in using the rating scale. Probing interviews indicated that these problems could be mitigated by improving written instructions regarding response options and by replacing some words. Participants generally were satisfied with the layout and structure of the tool, but some suggested enlarging font size and text spacing to improve readability. CONCLUSION: The tool appears to satisfactorily cover major person-centred care activities outlined in the gPCC framework. The inclusion of content concerning clinician manner and skills was seen as a relevant embellishment of the framework and as contributing to a more comprehensive assessment of clinician performance in the delivery of person-centred care. A revised version addressing observed content and usability issues will be tested for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability and for feasibility of use in healthcare education and quality improvement efforts.

Person-centredness in dementia care: an integrative review of theoretical approaches.

OBJECTIVES: This review identifies and examines theoretical approaches (components and objectives) to person-centred dementia care in order to obtain a better understanding of what is meant by the concept of person-centred dementia care. DESIGN: Following the approach of Whittemore and Knafl, an integrative literature review was conducted to answer the following questions: (1) Which theoretical approaches to person-centred dementia care have been published? (2) What are the components of the theoretical approaches to person-centred dementia care thus identified, and which objectives can be identified? DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCO) and PsycINFO (via EBSCO) were searched through to 26 April 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included any kind of published literature that describes theoretical approaches to person-centred dementia care and that was written in German or English. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data. Data were pooled using a data extraction form developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. A qualitative content analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The analysis revealed heterogeneous perspectives within the identified approaches to person-centred dementia care. Statements pertaining to the components and objectives could be assigned to three different subcategories (microlevel, macrolevel and application level). This analysis enabled an enhanced understanding of how person-centred dementia care is currently described and whether and how the theoretical approaches differ in terms of their orientations and their focus on the individual and/or on sociality, which allows conclusions regarding the underlying conceptual idea of personhood. CONCLUSIONS: There is a clear challenge for future research to overcome the dominance of the focus on the individual and to consider aspects of sociality to be at least equally important. This is needed in order to understand dementia as a multifaceted phenomenon that demands a differentiated consideration of theoretical notions of how to understand personhood in this context.

Care biography: A concept analysis.

In this article, we investigate how the concept of Care Biography and related concepts are understood and operationalised and describe how it can be applied to advancing our understanding and practice of holistic and person-centred care. Walker and Avant's eight-step concept analysis method was conducted involving multiple database searches, with potential or actual applications of Care Biography identified based on multiple discussions among all authors. Our findings demonstrate Care Biography to be a novel overarching concept derived from the conjunction of multiple other concepts and applicable across multiple care settings. Concepts related to Care Biography exist but were more narrowly defined and mainly applied in intensive care, aged care, and palliative care settings. They are associated with the themes of Meaningfulness and Existential Coping, Empathy and Understanding, Promoting Positive Relationships, Social and Cultural Contexts, and Self-Care, which we used to inform and refine our concept analysis of Care Biography. In Conclusion, the concept of Care Biography, can provide a deeper understanding of a person and their care needs, facilitate integrated and personalised care, empower people to be in control of their care throughout their life, and help promote ethical standards of care.

Patient-centered discharge summaries to support safety and individual health literacy: a double-blind randomized controlled trial in Austria.

BACKGROUND: To ensure a safe patient discharge from hospital it is necessary to transfer all relevant information in a discharge summary (DS). The aim of this study was to evaluate a bundle of measures to improve the DS for physicians, nurses and patients. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, four different versions of DS (2 original, 2 revised) were tested with physicians, nurses and patients. We used an evaluation sheet (Case report form, CRF) with a 6-point Likert scale (1 = completely agree; 6 = strongly disagree). RESULTS: In total, 441 participants (physicians n = 146, nurses n = 140, patients n = 155) were included in the study. Overall, the two revised DS received significant better ratings than the original DS (original 2.8 ± 0.8 vs. revised 2.1 ± 0.9, p < 0.001). Detailed results for the main domains are structured DS (original 1.9 ± 0.9 vs. revised 2.2 ± 1.3, p = 0.015), content (original 2.7 ± 0.9 vs revised 2.0 ± 0.9, p < 0.001) and comprehensibility (original 3.8 ± 1.2vs. revised 2.3 ± 1.2, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: With simple measures like avoiding abbreviations and describing indications or therapies with fixed contents, the DS can be significantly improved for physicians, nurses and patients at the same time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: First registration 13/11/2020 NCT04628728 at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , Update 15/03/2023.

Incorporating verbal and nonverbal aspects to enhance a model of patient communication in cancer care: A grounded theory study.

PURPOSE: High-quality communication is essential to patient-centered care. Existing communication models and research tends to focus on what is said verbally with little attention to nonverbal aspects of communication. In sensitive and emotionally intensive healthcare encounters, such as in cancer care, provider and patient nonverbal behavior may be particularly important for communicating with empathy. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a conceptual model of communication that accounts for nonverbal behavior. METHODS: We followed a systematic grounded theory design that involved semi-structured interviews with 23 providers, including nurse practitioners, physicians, surgeons, and physician's assistants. Using constant comparative analysis, we analyzed transcripts and developed a grounded theory model of communication accounting for nonverbal behavior. RESULTS: The major themes included building rapport, gauging how patients will take bad news, ensuring patients' understanding of their conditions, staying honest but hopeful, centering but guiding patient through cancer care, conveying empathy while managing heightened emotions, and ensuring patient understanding. Throughout the process, providers synthesize both verbal and nonverbal information and apply what they learn to future encounters. CONCLUSIONS: The results extend existing models of patient-centered communication and invite communication intervention and research that incorporates nonverbal behavior. The model contributes an understanding of the full process of communication in clinical encounters.

Best Practices in Caring for Seriously Ill Patients.

Palliative care (PC) is the art and science of providing goal-concordant care, skillfully managing complex and refractory pain and nonpain symptoms, mitigating suffering, and augmenting quality of life for seriously ill patients throughout the course of the illness trajectory. The primary team should provide generalist PC for all seriously ill patients and know when to refer patients to specialist PC. Specialty-level PC services should be reserved for complex problems beyond the scope of primary PC. This article reviews principles and best practices to support patient-centered PC.

A mixed methods evaluation of patient perspectives on the implementation of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: As cancer centers have increased focus on patient-centered, evidenced-based care, implementing efficient programs that facilitate effective patient-clinician communication remains critical. We implemented an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program ('cPRO' for cancer patient-reported outcomes). To aid evaluation of cPRO implementation, we asked patients receiving care in one of three geographical regions of an academic healthcare system about their experiences. METHODS: Using a sequential mixed-methods approach, we collected feedback in two waves. Wave 1 included virtual focus groups and interviews with patients who had completed cPRO. In Wave 2, we administered a structured survey to systematically examine Wave 1 themes. All participants had a diagnosed malignancy and received at least 2 invitations to complete cPRO. We used rapid and traditional qualitative methods to analyze Wave 1 data and focused on identifying facilitators and barriers to cPRO implementation. Wave 2 data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Participants (n = 180) were on average 62.9 years old; were majority female, White, non-Hispanic, and married; and represented various cancer types and phases of treatment. Wave 1 participants (n = 37) identified facilitators, including cPRO's perceived value and favorable usability, and barriers, including confusion about cPRO's purpose and various considerations for responding. High levels of clinician engagement with, and patient education on, cPRO were described as facilitators while low levels were described as barriers. Wave 2 (n = 143) data demonstrated high endorsement rates of cPRO's usability on domains such as navigability (91.6%), comprehensibility (98.7%), and relevance (82.4%). Wave 2 data also indicated low rates of understanding cPRO's purpose (56.7%), education from care teams about cPRO (22.5%), and discussing results of cPRO with care teams (16.3%). CONCLUSIONS: While patients reported high value and ease of use when completing cPRO, they also reported areas of confusion, emphasizing the importance of patient education on the purpose and use of cPRO and clinician engagement to sustain participation. These results guided successful implementation changes and will inform future improvements.

What matters to you? An observational field study of patient and care provider expectations for health care relationships.

Therapeutic connections (TC) between patients and providers are foundational to patient-centered care, which is co-produced between patients and care providers. This necessitates that we understand what patients expect from TCs, the extent to which providers know what patients expect, and what providers expect. The purpose of this study was to examine nine TC dimensions and determine which are most important to patients, which dimensions providers believe are most important to patients, and which are most important to providers. An online survey of patients (n = 388) and care providers (n = 433) was conducted in the USA in March 2021. Respondents rated the extent to which the nine TC dimensions were important to them, followed by open-ended questions to expand upon what matters. The quantitative responses were rank-ordered and rankings were compared across groups. All groups ranked "having the patient's best interest in mind no matter what" as the top expectation. Patients also ranked "caring commitment" and being "on the same page" as highly important. Providers were relatively accurate in ranking what they believed was most important to patients. Respondents affirmed the TC dimensions in the qualitative results, adding nuance and context, such as patients feeling "heard" and noting providers that go "above and beyond." Providers ranked dimensions differently for themselves, prioritizing "full presence" and "emotional support" of patients. This study is among the first to examine expectations for TC. TC could play an explanatory role in understanding variation in patient experience ratings and other outcomes.

InCHARGE: Co-creating, implementing and evaluating interventions to utilize nurses' competence and achieve person-centred fundamental care-A research protocol describing an action research approach.

AIM AND OBJECTIVES: This research protocol presents an action research project with the aim to demonstrate the value of person-centred fundamental care to nurses and nurse managers in surgical care units to encourage a far-reaching change in this direction. The objectives are to describe this process and to evaluate the effects on missed nursing care and person-centred fundamental care. METHODS: In a novel collaboration between nursing science and medical humanities the action research design will be used to interact with nursing staff and leaders in three surgical care units and design interventions with the purpose to affect the direction of nursing. Initially, the care units will be presented with interactive workshops including evidence-based education on person-centered fundamental care, person-centredness, nurse role responsibility and leadership. This will be followed by cocreation of interventions to stimulate person-centered fundamental care. The Fundamentals of Care framework will be used as the overarching theoretical framework. Data on missed nursing care, person-centred climate and person-centered fundamental care will be collected repeatedly from patient- and nursing stakeholders through interviews and validated questionnaires. Additionally, data from written reflections following clinical observations and focus group interviews will be included. The duration of the study will be approximately five years from ethical approval. DISCUSSION: It has been previously reported that the current working environments of registered nurses are forcing them to ration their caring responsibilities, leading to a lack of fulfillment of patients' fundamental care needs, with possible severe consequences for patients. The action research design helps researchers gain an understanding of the contextual factors important for forthcoming interventions, enabling reflective processes and cocreation of interventions with stakeholders. This may lead to feasible interventions and strengthen nursing leadership in the involved units.

What does good care look like to people living with congenital heart disease in the 21st century? Qualitative online, asynchronous discussion forums.

OBJECTIVES: As part of a wider study, our aim was to elicit perspectives of people with congenital heart disease (CHD) and/or their parents/carers about their experiences of healthcare and what is important to them when receiving care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative study involving a series of closed, asynchronous, online discussion forums underpinned by an interpretivist framework and set up and moderated by three patient charities via their Facebook pages. PARTICIPANTS: People with CHD and parents/carers of people with CHD from the UK. RESULTS: Five forums were run for 12-24 weeks across the three charities, and 343 participants signed up to the forums. Four linked themes related to processes of care were identified following thematic analysis of the transcripts: relationships and communication; access and coordination; experience of discrete episodes of care and psychological support. These impacted how care was experienced and, for some patients, outcomes of CHD and its treatment as well as broader health outcomes. In addition, context relating to stages of the patient journey was described, together with patient-related factors such as patients' knowledge and expertise in their own condition. CONCLUSIONS: People with CHD and their parents/carers want individualised, person-centred care delivered within an appropriately resourced, multidisciplinary service. Although examples of excellent care were provided it is evident that, from the perspective of patients and parents/carers, some National Health Service Standards for people with CHD were not being met.

Caesarean section on maternal request: a qualitative study of conflicts related to shared decision-making and person-centred care in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Today, person-centred care is seen as a cornerstone of health policy and practice, but accommodating individual patient preferences can be challenging, for example involving caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). The aim of this study was to explore Swedish health professionals' perspectives on CSMR and analyse them with regard to potential conflicts that may arise from person-centred care, specifically in relation to shared decision-making. METHODS: A qualitative study using both inductive and deductive content analysis was conducted based on semi-structured interviews. It was based on a purposeful sampling of 12 health professionals: seven obstetricians, three midwives and two neonatologists working at different hospitals in southern and central Sweden. The interviews were recorded either in a telephone call or in a video conference call, and audio files were deleted after transcription. RESULTS: In the interviews, twelve types of expressions (sub-categories) of five types of conflicts (categories) between shared decision-making and CSMR emerged. Most health professionals agreed in principle that women have the right to decide over their own body, but did not believe this included the right to choose surgery without medical indications (patient autonomy). The health professionals also expressed that they had to consider not only the woman's current preferences and health but also her future health, which could be negatively impacted by a CSMR (treatment quality and patient safety). Furthermore, the health professionals did not consider costs in the individual decision, but thought CSMR might lead to crowding-out effects (avoiding treatments that harm others). Although the health professionals emphasised that every CSMR request was addressed individually, they referred to different strategies for avoiding arbitrariness (equality and non-discrimination). Lastly, they described that CSMR entailed a multifaceted decision being individual yet collective, and the use of birth contracts in order to increase a woman's sense of security (an uncomplicated decision-making process). CONCLUSIONS: The complex landscape for handling CSMR in Sweden, arising from a restrictive approach centred on collective and standardised solutions alongside a simultaneous shift towards person-centred care and individual decision-making, was evident in the health professionals' reasoning. Although most health professionals emphasised that the mode of delivery is ultimately a professional decision, they still strived towards shared decision-making through information and support. Given the different views on CSMR, it is of utmost importance for healthcare professionals and women to reach a consensus on how to address this issue and to discuss what patient autonomy and shared decision-making mean in this specific context.

Person-centered care is today a widespread approach, but accommodating individual patient preferences can be challenging, for example involving caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). This study examines Swedish health professionals' views on CSMR. Interviews with 12 health professionals reveal conflicts between CSMR and key aspects of person-centered care, in particular shared decision-making. While professionals acknowledge women's autonomy, they question CSMR without medical need. Concerns include for example treatment quality and patient safety, and avoiding treatments that harm others. The Swedish context, balancing collective solutions with individualized care, complicates decision-making. Unlike countries with more private healthcare, where CSMR support might be higher, Swedish health professionals emphasize shared decision-making despite viewing the mode of delivery as primarily a professional decision. This study sheds light on the challenges in integrating CSMR into person-centered care frameworks.

The implementation and impacts of the Comprehensive Care Standard in Australian acute care hospitals: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive care (CC) is becoming a widely acknowledged standard for modern healthcare as it has the potential to improve health service delivery impacting both patient-centred care and clinical outcomes. In 2019, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care mandated the implementation of the Comprehensive Care Standard (CCS). However, little is known about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in acute care hospitals. Our study aimed to explore care professionals' self-reported knowledge, experiences, and perceptions about the implementation and impacts of the CCS in Australian acute care hospitals. METHODS: An online survey using a cross-sectional design that included Australian doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals in acute care hospitals was distributed through our research team and organisation, healthcare organisations, and clinical networks using various methods, including websites, newsletters, emails, and social media platforms. The survey items covered self-reported knowledge of the CCS and confidence in performing CC, experiences in consumer involvement and CC plans, and perceptions of organisational support and impacts of CCS on patient care and health outcomes. Quantitative data were analysed using Rstudio, and qualitative data were analysed thematically using Nvivo. RESULTS: 864 responses were received and 649 were deemed valid responses. On average, care professionals self-reported a moderate level of knowledge of the CCS (median = 3/5) and a high level of confidence in performing CC (median = 4/5), but they self-reported receiving only a moderate level of organisational support (median = 3/5). Only 4% (n = 17) of respondents believed that all patients in their unit had CCS-compliant care plans, which was attributed to lack of knowledge, motivation, teamwork, and resources, documentation issues, system and process limitations, and environment-specific challenges. Most participants believed the CCS introduction improved many aspects of patient care and health outcomes, but also raised healthcare costs. CONCLUSION: Care professionals are confident in performing CC but need more organisational support. Further education and training, resources, multidisciplinary collaboration, and systems and processes that support CC are needed to improve the implementation of the CCS. Perceived increased costs may hinder the sustainability of the CCS. Future research is needed to examine the cost-effectiveness of the implementation of the CCS.

AI-Powered Patient-Centered Care: A Call to Action for Innovation.

SUMMARY: The influential report Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century established six core objectives to enhance healthcare quality. It highlighted the necessity for healthcare to encompass safety, effectiveness, a patient-centered approach, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. This essay focuses on one of these six core objectives: a patient-centered approach. Healthcare leaders actively seek solutions to improve and ensure the delivery of high-quality care. The imperative to provide quality healthcare underscores the need for artificial intelligence (AI) to become an essential component in a patient-centered approach rather than merely an optional advantage. Despite the expansion of AI, there is a lack of understanding of how AI can improve patient-centered care. This essay examines the fundamental aspects of patient-centered care, as outlined by the Picker Institute, while also exploring the prospective role of AI in advancing the core principles of patient-centered care and proposing frameworks for applying AI in healthcare.

Patient-centric care in primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): shared decision-making and assessment of health-related quality of life.

ABSTRACTImmune thrombocytopenia (ITP), an autoimmune disease characterized by low platelet counts and increased bleeding risk, can impair health-related quality of life (HRQoL), impacting patients' daily lives and mental health. A number of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (both generic and specific to ITP) can be used to understand the impact of ITP on HRQoL and generate evidence to guide disease management. As well-developed PRO tools could help in HRQoL assessment, their optimization could help to solidify a patient-centric approach to ITP management. Shared decision-making is a collaborative process between a patient and their healthcare professional in making decisions about care. Treatment decisions based on this shared process between physician and patient are recommended by clinical guidelines. The goal of this narrative review is to discuss treatment decisions with regards to patient-centric ITP management, with a focus on the impact of PRO measures and the process of shared decision-making in practice.

Principles and elements of patient-centredness in mental health services: a thematic analysis of a systematic review of reviews.

INTRODUCTION: Mental health disorders, particularly depression and anxiety, are widespread globally and necessitate effective solutions. The patient-centred approach has been identified as a viable and effective method for addressing these challenges. This paper synthesised the principles of patient-centred mental health services and provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a qualitative content analysis study conducted in a systematic review framework in 2022. PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest and Cochrane databases were systematically searched, and by screening the titles, abstracts, and the texts of studies related to the purpose of the research, the data were extracted. Evaluation of the quality of the studies was done using the CASP checklist for qualitative studies. After selecting the final studies based on the entry and exit criteria, subsequently, a thematic analysis of findings was conducted on the data obtained from the systematic review. RESULTS: The database search produced 6649 references. After screening, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The quality scores indicated the studies were of high level of quality with acceptable risk of bias. The thematic analysis identified six major principles of patient-centredness in mental health services: education, involvement and cooperation, access, effectiveness and safety, health and well-being, and ethics. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centredness is a complex approach in mental health services. The principles and elements of patient-centredness foster positive patient outcomes, enhance healthcare quality and ensure compassionate and effective care. Upholding these principles is crucial for delivering patient-centred, ethical and effective mental health services. Furthermore, the study found that patient education can boost adherence and satisfaction, and decrease unnecessary hospitalisations. Patient involvement in decision-making is influenced by their age and the relationship with their psychologists. And, effective leadership and resource management can enhance clinical processes and patient-centredness in mental health services.

Cluster randomised trial of a health system strengthening approach applying person-centred communication for the prevention of female genital mutilation in Guinea, Kenya and Somalia.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on effective health systems interventions for preventing female genital mutilation (FGM). This study tested a two-level intervention package at primary care applying person-centred communication (PCC) for FGM prevention. METHODS: A cluster randomised trial was conducted in 2020-2021 in 180 antenatal care (ANC) clinics in Guinea, Kenya and Somalia. At baseline, all clinics received guidance and materials on FGM prevention and care; at month 3, ANC providers at intervention sites received PCC training. Data were collected from clinic managers, ANC providers and clients at baseline, month 3 and month 6 on primary outcomes, including delivery of PCC counselling, utilisation of level one materials, health facility preparedness for FGM prevention and care services and secondary outcomes related to clients' and providers' knowledge and attitudes. Data were analysed using multilevel and single-level logistic regression models. RESULTS: Providers in the intervention arm were more likely to deliver PCC for FGM prevention compared with those in the control arm, including inquiring about clients' FGM status (adjusted OR (AOR): 8.9, 95% CI: 6.9 to 11.5; p<0.001) and FGM-related beliefs (AOR: 9.7, 95% CI: 7.5 to 12.5; p<0.001) and discussing why (AOR: 9.2, 95% CI: 7.1 to 11.9; p<0.001) or how (AOR: 7.7, 95% CI: 6.0 to 9.9; p<0.001) FGM should be prevented. They were more confident in their FGM-related knowledge (AOR: 7.0, 95% CI: 1.5 to 32.3; p=0.012) and communication skills (AOR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0 to 3.2; p=0.035). Intervention clients were less supportive of FGM (AOR: 5.4, 95% CI: 2.4 to 12.4; p<0.001) and had lower intentions of having their daughters undergo FGM (AOR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.7; p=0.004) or seeking medicalised FGM (AOR: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.5; p<0.001) compared with those in the control arm. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to provide evidence of an effective FGM prevention intervention that can be delivered in primary care settings in high-prevalence countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION AND DATE: PACTR201906696419769 (3 June 2019).