Educational Needs and Preferences for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in the Cystic Fibrosis Community: Mixed Methods Study

Hope in Every Breath: Navigating the Therapeutic Landscape of Cystic Fibrosis

Cystic fibrosis (CF) has long posed a complex challenge to medical science. Still, the tides are turning with remarkable progress in prognosis and demographics, thanks to cutting-edge medical management and treatment breakthroughs. It affects multiple systems, necessitating a comprehensive approach to its management. This article thoroughly reviews the latest advancements in CF treatment across three key areas: respiratory care, infection prevention, and pharmacological management. In respiratory care, emphasis is placed on airway clearance therapies and nebulized saline, while infection prevention strategies encompass hand hygiene, respiratory etiquette, and environmental cleaning and disinfection. Pharmacological management explores pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT), antimicrobial treatments, cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) modulators, and promising gene therapies. Patient education and support are highlighted as crucial components of effective CF management, while mental health assessments are emphasized due to CF patients' susceptibility to anxiety and depression. This review highlights the tremendous progress made in the management of CF. Integrating early detection, infection prevention, pharmacological interventions, gene therapy, and patient support is revolutionizing the care and quality of life for individuals with CF.

Patient preferences and choices as a reflection of trust-A cluster analysis comparing postsurgical perceptions in a private and a public hospital

Background

Active participation of patients in managing their medical treatment is a major component of the patient empowerment process and may contribute to better clinical outcomes. Patient perceptions and preferences affect the patient–physician encounter in a variety of dimensions, such as patient autonomy, freedom of choice and trust in the healthcare system. The Israeli healthcare system is mostly publicly funded, with additional private healthcare services for surgery and other medical treatments. The aim of this study was to compare the perceptions and preferences of patients in the public and private hospitals in Israel.

Methods

A cross‐sectional study among 545 individuals who had surgical procedures at two hospitals in Israel (one public and one private). A structured questionnaire comprising 23 items was used to collect perceptions via personal telephone interviews. The responses were categorized into five clusters and compared by type of health services provider (public vs. private) and sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age and education level).

Results

A hierarchical cluster analysis methodology identified five conceptual groups: trust, concern towards medical errors, dialogue between medical staff and the patient/patient's family, confidentiality and staff bias towards more informed patients, or those with supportive families. Four main themes that highlight patients' preferences were found: physical conditions, personal empowerment and perceived autonomy, patient experience and patient–provider encounter communication. Significant differences between the private and the public healthcare systems were found in four clusters: trust and patient care, patient's concerns, the extent of explanation and medical staff's commitment. Differences secondary to sociodemographic parameters were noticed: patients treated at the private hospital scored significantly higher items of trust, medical staff caring and the importance of choosing their treating surgeon, while patients treated at the public hospital scored higher staff commitment to the patient than those treated at the private hospital.

Conclusions

The study revealed the perceptions underlying the decisions of patients to undergo surgical procedures in public or private hospitals. Mutual learning could pave the way to better patient–physician encounters.

Patient or Public Contribution

Patients from the two hospitals were involved in this study by responding to the questionnaire. The data presented is based on the patient's responses.

Development and evaluation of a virtual patient-centered outcomes research training program for the cystic fibrosis community

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) emphasizes patient-generated research priorities and outcomes, and engages patients throughout every stage of the research process. In the cystic fibrosis (CF) community, patients frequently provide input into research studies, but rarely are integrated onto research teams. Therefore, we developed and evaluated a virtual pilot PCOR training program to build PCOR capacity in the CF community (patients, caregivers, researchers, nonprofit stakeholders and providers). We aimed to show changes among participants' perceived PCOR knowledge (a.k.a PCOR knowledge), confidence in engaging stakeholders, and post-training session satisfaction.

METHODS

Guided by a prior CF community educational needs assessment, our researcher and patient-partner team co-developed a four-part virtual online training program. We structured the program towards two learner groups: patients/caregivers and researchers/providers. We evaluated participants' PCOR knowledge, confidence in engaging stakeholders, and session satisfaction by administering 5-point Likert participant surveys. We tested for significant differences between median ratings pre- and post-training.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients/caregivers, and 31 researchers/providers participated. For both learner groups, we found the training resulted in significantly higher PCOR knowledge scores regarding "levels of engagement" (p = .008). For the patient/caregiver group, training significantly increased their PCOR knowledge about the barriers/enablers to doing PCOR (p = .017), effective PCOR team elements (p = .039), active participation (p = .012), and identifying solutions for successful PCOR teams (p = .021). For the researcher/healthcare provider group, training significantly increased participants' ability to describe PCOR core principles (p = .016), identify patient-partners (p = .039), formulate research from patient-driven priorities (p = .039), and describe engagement in research grants (p = .006). No learner group had significant changes in their confidence score. Most participants were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the training program.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our virtual pilot PCOR training program was well received by patients, caregivers, researchers and providers in the CF community. Participants significantly improved their perceived knowledge with core PCOR learning items. Trial registration Retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04999865).