Integrating clinical and public health knowledge in support of joint medical practice

Author:

Unger Jean-Pierre,Morales Ingrid,De Paepe Pierre,Roland Michel

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundStrong relations between medicine and public health have long been advocated. Today, professional medical practice assumes joint clinical/public health objectives:GPs are expected to practice community medicine;Hospital specialists can be involved in disease control and health service organisation;Doctors can teach, coach, evaluate, and coordinate care;Clinicians should interpret protocols with reference to clinical epidemiology.Public health physicians should tailor preventive medicine to individual health risks.This paper is targeted at those practitioners and academics responsible for their teams’ professionalism and the accessibility of care, where the authors argue in favour of the epistemological integration of clinical medicine and public health.Main textBased on empirical evidence the authors revisit the epistemological border of clinical and public health knowledge to support joint practice. From action-research and cognitive psychology, we derive clinical/public health knowledge categories that require different transmission and discovery techniques.The knowledge needed to support the universal human right to access professional care bridges both clinical and public health concepts, and summons professional ethics to validate medical decisions. To provide a rational framework for teaching and research, we propose the following categories:‘Know-how/practice techniques’, corresponding a.o. to behavioural, communication, and manual skills;‘Procedural knowledge’ to choose and apply procedures that meet explicit quality criteria;‘Practical knowledge’ to design new procedures and inform the design of established procedures in new contexts; andTheoretical knowledge teaches the reasoning and theory of knowledge and the laws of existence and functioning of reality to validate clinical and public health procedures.Even though medical interventions benefit from science, they are, in essence, professional: science cannot standardise eco-biopsychosocial decisions; doctor-patient negotiations; emotional intelligence; manual and behavioural skills; and resolution of ethical conflicts.ConclusionBecause the quality of care utilises the professionals’ skill-base but is also affected by their intangible motivations, health systems should individually tailor continuing medical education and treat collective knowledge management as a priority. Teamwork and coaching by those with more experience provide such opportunities. In the future, physicians and health professionals could jointly develop clinical/public health integrated knowledge. To this end, governments should make provision to finance non-clinical activities.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3