1
|
Haroutounian S, Holzer KJ, Kerns RD, Veasley C, Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Carman KL, Chambers CT, Cowan P, Edwards RR, Eisenach JC, Farrar JT, Ferguson M, Forsythe LP, Freeman R, Gewandter JS, Gilron I, Goertz C, Grol-Prokopczyk H, Iyengar S, Jordan I, Kamp C, Kleykamp BA, Knowles RL, Langford DJ, Mackey S, Malamut R, Markman J, Martin KR, McNicol E, Patel KV, Rice AS, Rowbotham M, Sandbrink F, Simon LS, Steiner DJ, Vollert J. Patient engagement in designing, conducting, and disseminating clinical pain research: IMMPACT recommended considerations. Pain 2024; 165:1013-1028. [PMID: 38198239 PMCID: PMC11017749 DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2023] [Revised: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024]
Abstract
ABSTRACT In the traditional clinical research model, patients are typically involved only as participants. However, there has been a shift in recent years highlighting the value and contributions that patients bring as members of the research team, across the clinical research lifecycle. It is becoming increasingly evident that to develop research that is both meaningful to people who have the targeted condition and is feasible, there are important benefits of involving patients in the planning, conduct, and dissemination of research from its earliest stages. In fact, research funders and regulatory agencies are now explicitly encouraging, and sometimes requiring, that patients are engaged as partners in research. Although this approach has become commonplace in some fields of clinical research, it remains the exception in clinical pain research. As such, the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials convened a meeting with patient partners and international representatives from academia, patient advocacy groups, government regulatory agencies, research funding organizations, academic journals, and the biopharmaceutical industry to develop consensus recommendations for advancing patient engagement in all stages of clinical pain research in an effective and purposeful manner. This article summarizes the results of this meeting and offers considerations for meaningful and authentic engagement of patient partners in clinical pain research, including recommendations for representation, timing, continuous engagement, measurement, reporting, and research dissemination.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simon Haroutounian
- Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Katherine J. Holzer
- Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Robert D. Kerns
- Departments of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Christin Veasley
- Chronic Pain Research Alliance, North Kingstown, RI, United States
| | - Robert H. Dworkin
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Dennis C. Turk
- Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Kristin L. Carman
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), Washington, DC, United States
| | - Christine T. Chambers
- Departments of Psychology & Neuroscience and Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, and Centre for Pediatric Pain Research, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | - Penney Cowan
- American Chronic Pain Association, Rocklin, CA, United States
| | - Robert R. Edwards
- Department of Anesthesiology, Harvard Medical School, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
| | - James C. Eisenach
- Departments of Anesthesiology, Physiology and Pharmacology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC, United States
| | - John T. Farrar
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - McKenzie Ferguson
- Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, School of Pharmacy, Edwardsville, IL, United States
| | - Laura P. Forsythe
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), Washington, DC, United States
| | - Roy Freeman
- Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer S. Gewandter
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Ian Gilron
- Departments of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine and Biomedical & Molecular Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Christine Goertz
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States
| | | | - Smriti Iyengar
- Division of Translational Research, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Isabel Jordan
- Departments of Psychology & Neuroscience and Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, and Centre for Pediatric Pain Research, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | - Cornelia Kamp
- Center for Health and Technology/Clinical Materials Services Unit, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Bethea A. Kleykamp
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States
| | - Rachel L. Knowles
- Medical Research Council (part of UK Research and Innovation), London, United Kingdom
| | - Dale J. Langford
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, United States
| | - Sean Mackey
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, United States
| | | | - John Markman
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
| | - Kathryn R. Martin
- Aberdeen Centre for Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Health, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Ewan McNicol
- Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Kushang V. Patel
- Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Andrew S.C. Rice
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Rowbotham
- Departments of Anesthesia and Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Friedhelm Sandbrink
- National Pain Management, Opioid Safety, and Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, Specialty Care Program Office, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, United States
| | | | - Deborah J. Steiner
- Global Pain, Pain & Neurodegeneration, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, United States
| | - Jan Vollert
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
- Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Münster, Germany
- Department of Neurophysiology, Mannheim Center for Translational Neuroscience MCTN, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Ruprecht Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cassidy CE, Shin HD, Ramage E, Conway A, Mrklas K, Laur C, Beck A, Varin MD, Steinwender S, Nguyen T, Langley J, Dorey R, Donnelly L, Ormel I. Trainee-led research using an integrated knowledge translation or other research partnership approaches: a scoping reviews. Health Res Policy Syst 2021; 19:135. [PMID: 34727926 PMCID: PMC8561363 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-021-00784-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are increasing expectations for researchers and knowledge users in the health system to use a research partnership approach, such as integrated knowledge translation, to increase the relevance and use of research findings in health practice, programmes and policies. However, little is known about how health research trainees engage in research partnership approaches such as IKT. In response, the purpose of this scoping review was to map and characterize the evidence related to using an IKT or other research partnership approach from the perspective of health research trainees in thesis and/or postdoctoral work. METHODS We conducted this scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We searched the following databases in June 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched sources of unpublished studies and grey literature. We reported our findings in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. RESULTS We included 74 records that described trainees' experiences using an IKT or other research partnership approach to health research. The majority of studies involved collaboration with knowledge users in the research question development, recruitment and data collection stages of the research process. Intersecting barriers to IKT or other research partnerships at the individual, interpersonal and organizational levels were reported, including lack of skills in partnership research, competing priorities and trainees' "outsider" status. We also identified studies that evaluated their IKT approach and reported impacts on partnership formation, such as valuing different perspectives, and enhanced relevance of research. CONCLUSION Our review provides insights for trainees interested in IKT or other research partnership approaches and offers guidance on how to apply an IKT approach to their research. The review findings can serve as a basis for future reviews and primary research focused on IKT principles, strategies and evaluation. The findings can also inform IKT training efforts such as guideline development and academic programme development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Emily Ramage
- School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia
| | - Aislinn Conway
- Better Outcomes and Registry Network (BORN), Ottawa, ON Canada
| | - Kelly Mrklas
- Alberta Health Services Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB Canada
| | - Celia Laur
- Institute for Health System Solutions and Virtual Care, Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | - Amy Beck
- Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada
| | | | | | - Tram Nguyen
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON Canada
| | - Jodi Langley
- School of Health and Human Performance, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS Canada
| | | | | | - Ilja Ormel
- Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fredriksson M, Modigh A. Patient involvement at the managerial level: the effectiveness of a patient and family advisory council at a regional cancer centre in Sweden. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21:1011. [PMID: 34560865 PMCID: PMC8464098 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-07026-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In cancer care as well as other types of treatment and care, little is known about the contribution of Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs) operating at the managerial level in healthcare organizations. The aim of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of a Swedish PFAC operating at the managerial level at one of Sweden's six regional cancer centres. METHODS This was a qualitative, single-case study based on interviews with PFAC participants and meeting minutes from PFAC meetings. These were analysed using a modified version of a framework developed by Abelson et al. to design and evaluate collective involvement processes in the healthcare sector: (i) representation; (ii) information; (iii) process or procedures and (iv) outcomes and decisions. RESULTS The descriptive representation was good regarding geographical location and cancer diagnosis. Information from the regional cancer centre was an important part of the meeting agenda. The procedures encouraged everyone to speak up, and the participants saw the representatives from the regional cancer centre as allies against the hospitals and regions, raising some questions about the PFAC's independence. Regarding outcomes, most participants did not know to what extent their work had led to any improvements in cancer care. However, they still regarded the council as effective, as issues the participants raised were listened to by the representatives from the regional cancer centre and 'taken further' in the healthcare organization. CONCLUSIONS The participants were satisfied with being listened to, but they found it difficult to know whether their work had led to improvements, in part because they did not know enough about how the healthcare organization worked above the care-provision level. This was a hurdle to achieving change. The study suggests it is more difficult for patients and next of kin to participate at the managerial level, compared to the care-provision level in healthcare systems, where they could potentially influence important aspects of cancer care and policy, since it is at these levels strategic decisions about priorities in cancer care and service configurations are made. This indicates that there is a particular need for guidance and support for patient and public involvement to work successfully at this level, which may include relevant education and training in system knowledge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mio Fredriksson
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22, Uppsala, Sweden.
| | - Anton Modigh
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Box 564, 751 22, Uppsala, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Coren F, Brown MK, Ikeda DJ, Tietz D, Steinbock C, Baim-Lance A, Agins BD. Beyond tokenism in quality management policy and programming: moving from participation to meaningful involvement of people with HIV in New York State. Int J Qual Health Care 2021; 33:6068878. [PMID: 33415331 DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2020] [Revised: 11/07/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Consumer involvement in health-care policy and quality management (QM) programming is a key element in making health systems people-centered. Involvement of health-care consumers in these areas, however, remains underdeveloped and under-prioritized. When consumer involvement is actively realized, few mechanisms for assessing its impact have been developed. The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) embraces consumer involvement of people with HIV in QM as a guiding principle, informed by early HIV/AIDS advocacy and a framework of people-centered quality care. METHOD HIV consumer involvement is implemented statewide and informs all quality of care programming as a standard for QM in health-care organizations, implemented through four key several initiatives: (i) a statewide HIV Consumer Quality Advisory Committee; (ii) leadership and QM trainings for consumers; (iii) specific tools and activities to engage consumers in QM activities at state, regional and health-care facility levels and (iv) formal organizational assessments of consumer involvement in health-care facility QM programs. RESULTS We review the literature on this topic and place the methods used by the NYSDOH within a theoretical framework for consumer involvement. CONCLUSION We present a model that offers a paradigm for practical implementation of routine consumer involvement in QM programs that can be replicated in other health-care settings, both disease-specific and general, reflecting the priority of active participation of consumers in QM activities at all levels of the health system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Freda Coren
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
| | | | - Daniel J Ikeda
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Daniel Tietz
- New York State Department of Health, AIDS Institute, 90 Church Street, New York, NY 10007, USA
| | - Clemens Steinbock
- New York State Department of Health, AIDS Institute, 90 Church Street, New York, NY 10007, USA
| | - Abigail Baim-Lance
- Veterans Health Administration James J. Peters VA Medical Center, 130 West Kingsbridge Road, Bronx, NY 10468, USA
| | - Bruce D Agins
- University of California, San Francisco Institute for Global Health Sciences 550 16th Street, Third Floor, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Singh S, Burns KK, Rees J, Picklyk D, Spence J, Marlett N. Patient and family engagement in Alberta Health Services: Improving care delivery and research outcomes. Healthc Manage Forum 2019; 31:57-61. [PMID: 29488408 DOI: 10.1177/0840470417747003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Engaging patients and families in research and the design of quality improvement is an essential component of Patient and Family Centred Care (PFCC). Alberta Health Services (AHS) has been engaging patients and families to promote a cultural shift towards PFCC. The AHS trains patient and family advisors to share their experiences and encourages staff to work with advisors to co-design improvements in care. This article briefly describes the role and growth of patient and family advisors, advisory groups, and the participation of advisors in research initiatives through AHS' Strategic Clinical NetworksTM. It also describes recent efforts to build AHS' patient and family engagement capacity by introducing standard patient engagement training, supporting the creation of the innovative Patient and Community Engagement Research internship program, and by developing tools to measure the impact of patient and advisors on AHS. And finally, this article provides key learnings for health leaders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Singh
- 1 Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | | | - Jennifer Rees
- 2 Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | | | | | - Nancy Marlett
- 3 Cummings School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kreindler SA. Advancing the evaluation of integrated knowledge translation. Health Res Policy Syst 2018; 16:104. [PMID: 30400942 PMCID: PMC6218993 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-018-0383-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2018] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) flows from the premise that knowledge co-produced with decision-makers is more likely to inform subsequent decisions. However, evaluations of manager/policy-maker-focused IKT often concentrate on intermediate outcomes, stopping short of assessing whether research findings have contributed to identifiable organisational action. Such hesitancy may reflect the difficulty of tracing the causes of this distal, multifactorial outcome. This paper elucidates how an approach based on realistic evaluation could advance the field. Main Text Realistic evaluation views outcomes as a joint product of intervention mechanisms and context. Through identification of context–mechanism–outcome configurations, it enables the systematic testing and refinement of ‘mid-range theory’ applicable to diverse interventions that share a similar underlying logic of action. The ‘context-sensitive causal chain’ diagram, a tool adapted from the broader theory-based evaluation literature, offers a useful means of visualising the posited chain from activities to outcomes via mechanisms, and the context factors that facilitate or disrupt each linkage (e.g. activity–mechanism, mechanism–outcome). Drawing on relevant literature, this paper proposes a context-sensitive causal chain by which IKT may generate instrumental use of research findings (i.e. direct use to make a concrete decision) and identifies an existing tool to assess this outcome, then adapts the chain to describe a more subtle, indirect pathway of influence. Key mechanisms include capacity- and relationship-building among researchers and decision-makers, changes in the (perceived) credibility and usability of findings, changes in decision-makers’ beliefs and attitudes, and incorporation of new knowledge in an actual decision. Project-specific context factors may impinge upon each linkage; equally important is the organisation’s absorptive capacity, namely its overall ability to acquire, assimilate and apply knowledge. Given a sufficiently poor decision-making environment, even well-implemented IKT that triggers important mechanisms may fall short of its desired outcomes. Further research may identify additional mechanisms and context factors. Conclusion By investigating ‘what it is about an intervention that works, for whom, under what conditions’, realistic evaluation addresses questions of causality head-on without sacrificing complexity. A realist approach could contribute greatly to our ability to assess – and, ultimately, to increase – the value of IKT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara A Kreindler
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, 451-753 McDermot Ave., Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0T6, Canada. .,George & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation, University of Manitoba, 451-753 McDermot Ave, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0T6, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|