Exploring disconnected discourses about Patient and Public Involvement and Volunteer Involvement in English health and social care

Abstract Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health and social care policy, service decision‐making and research are presented as good practice in England. Yet the explicit rationale for PPI and how it is positioned within the literature, policy and practice remain confused, in partic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jurgen Grotz (Author), Linda Birt (Author), Heather Edwards (Author), Michael Locke (Author), Fiona Poland (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wiley, 2021-02-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_d3d5b9549c6d4450b7d9136b9843ca6f
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Jurgen Grotz  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Linda Birt  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Heather Edwards  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Michael Locke  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Fiona Poland  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Exploring disconnected discourses about Patient and Public Involvement and Volunteer Involvement in English health and social care 
260 |b Wiley,   |c 2021-02-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 1369-7625 
500 |a 1369-6513 
500 |a 10.1111/hex.13162 
520 |a Abstract Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health and social care policy, service decision‐making and research are presented as good practice in England. Yet the explicit rationale for PPI and how it is positioned within the literature, policy and practice remain confused, in particular, in relation to Volunteer Involvement (VI). In health and social care, PPI and VI are managed and valued as conceptually distinct, yet the discourses in their policy and practice documents treat them as closely related in fundamental ways. Objective Compare and critically evaluate discourses framing PPI and VI within English health and social care. Design A critical discourse approach was used to explore the accounts of PPI and VI in policy. These accounts were then compared and contrasted with personal accounts of volunteering in health and social care settings. Results Twenty documents from key national health and social care bodies were discursively examined in terms of their framing PPI and VI. A narrative disconnect between the two was repeatedly confirmed. This finding contrasted with an analysis of personal accounts of VI which displayed VI as a form of PPI. Conclusion There is a disconnect between language, narratives and practice in PPI and in VI which may have direct consequences for policy and practice. Recognising and managing it can offer innovative ways of enabling volunteers to be involved across health and social care settings, ensuring the experiential value added by volunteers' service contributions, to be recognised so that their democratic participation may be seen to shape services. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a volunteering 
690 |a health and social care 
690 |a NHS 
690 |a patient and public involvement 
690 |a voluntary action 
690 |a social theory 
690 |a Medicine (General) 
690 |a R5-920 
690 |a Public aspects of medicine 
690 |a RA1-1270 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Health Expectations, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 8-18 (2021) 
787 0 |n https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13162 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1369-6513 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1369-7625 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/d3d5b9549c6d4450b7d9136b9843ca6f  |z Connect to this object online.