Consumer involvement in the development and dissemination of chronic kidney disease guidelines: a summary of a meaningful and sustainable approach developed by Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guidelines

OBJECTIVES

The involvement of consumers (people with lived experience of disease) in guidelines is widely advocated to improve their relevance and uptake. However, the approaches to consumer involvement in guidelines vary and are not well documented. We describe the consumer involvement framework of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment Guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We used a descriptive document analysis to collate all relevant policies, documents, e-mails, and presentations on consumer involvement in our organizations. We performed a narrative synthesis of collated data to summarize our evolving consumer involvement approach in guidelines.

RESULTS

We involve consumers at all levels of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guideline development and dissemination according to their capacity, from conducting consumer workshops to inform the scope of guidelines, to including consumers as members of the guideline Working Groups and overseeing operations and governance as members of the Steering Committee and staff. Our approach has resulted in tangible outcomes including high-priority topics on patient education, psychosocial care, and clinical care pathways, and focusing the literature reviews to assess patient-important outcomes. The ongoing partnership with consumers led to the generation of consumer version guidelines to improve guideline dissemination and translation to support shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Meaningful consumer involvement can be achieved through a comprehensive approach across the entire lifecycle of guidelines. However, it must be individualized by ensuring that the involvement of consumers is timely and flexible. Future work is needed to assess the impact of consumer involvement in guideline development.

The impact of a regionally based translational cancer research collaborative in Australia using the FAIT methodology

BACKGROUND

Translating research, achieving impact, and assessing impact are important aspirations for all research collaboratives but can prove challenging. The Hunter Cancer Research Alliance (HCRA) was funded from 2014 to 2021 to enhance capacity and productivity in cancer research in a regional centre in Australia. This study aimed to assess the impact and benefit of the HCRA to help inform future research investments of this type.

METHOD

The Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research (FAIT) was selected as the preferred methodology. FAIT incorporates three validated methodologies for assessing impact: 1) Modified Payback; 2) Economic Analysis; and 3) Narrative overview and case studies. All three FAIT methods are underpinned by a Program Logic Model. Data were collected from HCRA and the University of Newcastle administrative records, directly from HCRA members, and website searches.

RESULTS

In addition to advancing knowledge and providing capacity building support to members via grants, fellowships, scholarships, training, events and targeted translation support, key impacts of HCRA-member research teams included: (i) the establishment of a regional biobank that has distributed over 13,600 samples and became largely self-sustaining; (ii) conservatively leveraging $43.8 M (s.a.$20.5 M - $160.5 M) in funding and support from the initial $9.7 M investment; (iii) contributing to clinical practice guidelines and securing a patent for identification of stem cells for endometrial cell regeneration; (iv) shifting the treatment paradigm for all tumour types that rely on nerve cell innervation, (v) development and implementation of the world's first real-time patient treatment verification system (Watchdog); (vi) inventing the effective 'EAT' psychological intervention to improve nutrition and outcomes in people experiencing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer; (vi) developing effective interventions to reduce smoking rates among priority groups, currently being rolled out to disadvantaged populations in NSW; and (vii) establishing a Consumer Advisory Panel and Consumer Engagement Committee to increase consumer involvement in research.

CONCLUSION

Using FAIT methodology, we have demonstrated the significant impact and downstream benefits that can be achieved by the provision of infrastructure-type funding to regional and rural research collaboratives to help address inequities in research activity and health outcomes and demonstrates a positive return on investment.

Attitudes on Artificial Intelligence use in Pediatric Care From Parents of Hospitalized Children

INTRODUCTION

Artificial intelligence (AI) may benefit pediatric healthcare, but it also raises ethical and pragmatic questions. Parental support is important for the advancement of AI in pediatric medicine. However, there is little literature describing parental attitudes toward AI in pediatric healthcare, and existing studies do not represent parents of hospitalized children well.

METHODS

We administered the Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Healthcare, a validated survey, to parents of hospitalized children in a single tertiary children's hospital. Surveys were administered by trained study personnel (11/2/2021-5/1/2022). Demographic data were collected. An Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Healthcare score, assessing openness toward AI-assisted medicine, was calculated for seven areas of concern. Subgroup analyses were conducted using Mann-Whitney U tests to assess the effect of race, gender, education, insurance, length of stay, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission on AI use.

RESULTS

We approached 90 parents and conducted 76 surveys for a response rate of 84%. Overall, parents were open to the use of AI in pediatric medicine. Social justice, convenience, privacy, and shared decision-making were important concerns. Parents of children admitted to an ICU expressed the most significantly different attitudes compared to parents of children not admitted to an ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents were overall supportive of AI-assisted healthcare decision-making. In particular, parents of children admitted to ICU have significantly different attitudes, and further study is needed to characterize these differences. Parents value transparency and disclosure pathways should be developed to support this expectation.

Improving the capacity of researchers and bereaved parents to co-design and translate stillbirth research together

BACKGROUND

Working with bereaved parents in co-designed stillbirth research, policy and practice is essential to improving care and outcomes.

PROBLEM

Effective parent engagement is often lacking. This may be due to bereaved parents not feeling adequately and appropriately supported to be involved.

AIM

To consult bereaved parents with the aim to understand their experiences, attitudes, and needs around involvement in stillbirth research and gain feedback about the usefulness and appropriateness of a proposed co-designed guide to support their involvement, including content and design aspects of this resource.

METHODS

An online co-designed survey was disseminated via Australian parent support organisations social media in August 2022.

FINDINGS

All 90 respondents were bereaved parents, 94% (n = 85) were female. Two-thirds (67%, n = 60) had never participated in stillbirth research, 80% (n = 72) agreed involvement of bereaved parents in research was important or extremely important and 81% (n = 73) were interested in future research involvement. Common motivations for involvement were wanting to leave a legacy for their baby and knowing research outcomes. Common barriers included not having been asked to participate or not knowing how. Most (89%, n = 80) agreed the proposed guide would be useful. Highly valued topics were the importance of bereaved parents' voices in stillbirth research and how they can make a difference.

CONCLUSION

The majority of bereaved parents we surveyed want to be involved in stillbirth research and would value a resource to support this. The proposed concept and content for a co-designed guide to aid engagement was well supported.

Protocol for co-producing a framework and integrated resource platform for engaging patients in laboratory-based research

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in research is the meaningful and collaborative interaction between patients and researchers throughout the research process. Patient engagement can help to ensure patient-oriented values and perspectives are incorporated into the development, conduct, and dissemination of research. While patient engagement is increasingly prevalent in clinical research, it remains relatively unrealized in preclinical laboratory research. This may reflect the nature of preclinical research, in which routine interactions or engagement with patients may be less common. Our team of patient partners and researchers has previously identified few published examples of patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, as well as a paucity of guidance on this topic. Here we propose the development of a process framework to facilitate patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research.

METHODS

Our team, inclusive of researchers and patient partners, will develop a comprehensive, empirically-derived, and stakeholder-informed process framework for 'patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research.' First, our team will create a 'deliberative knowledge space' to conduct semi-structured discussions that will inform a draft framework for preclinical patient engagement. Over the course of several sessions, we will identify actions, activities, barriers, and enablers (e.g. considerations and motivations for patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, define roles of key players). The resulting draft process framework will be further populated with examples and refined through an international consensus-building Delphi survey with patients, researchers, and other collaborator organizations. We will then conduct pilot field tests to evaluate the framework with preclinical laboratory research groups paired with patient partners. These results will be used to create a refined framework enriched with real-world examples and considerations. All resources developed will be made available through an online repository.

DISCUSSION

Our proposed process framework will provide guidance, best practices, and standardized procedures to promote patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. Supporting and facilitating patient engagement in this setting presents an exciting new opportunity to help realize the important impact that patients can make.

Co-designing a personalised care plan for patients with rectal cancer: reflections and practical learnings

BACKGROUND

Consumer involvement is considered an essential component of contemporary cancer research, with a movement towards participatory methods, to the benefit of consumers and researchers. Overall, in-depth research on participant experiences and perceptions of their co-designer role-and how these may (or may not) change during a co-design project-is limited. The purpose of this paper was to synthesise the reflective accounts of consumers, project staff, and a researcher who partnered on a project to develop a personalised care plan template, with the aim of generating guidance for others looking to partner with consumers in health and medical research. Here, our team of researchers, project staff, and consumers reflect on the experience of working together using Gibbs' Reflective Cycle, which was completed by team members with responses then undergoing inductive data analysis.

RESULTS

Reflections are categorised under three core themes: (1) setting up the group and building relationships (2) measuring the value of consumer involvement, and (3) potential challenges for consumer involvement. Through reflection on our experiences of co-design, our team developed and identified practical strategies that contributed to the success of our partnership. These include setting expectations as a group; having experienced consumers on the team; having regular, pre-scheduled meetings that run to time; and working to overcome challenges identified by the group such as power imbalances, time commitment, and lack of diversity.

CONCLUSION

These practical reflections on creating a safe and supportive environment in which genuine consumer involvement can take place could inform other institutions and researchers looking to work meaningfully with consumers in research.

Patients' perspectives on the relevance of biosimilars' outcomes in oncology: qualitative study with nominal group technique

PURPOSE

We aimed to rate the importance of outcomes from a systematic review about biosimilars in oncology from patients' perspective.

METHODS

This is a qualitative research with nominal group technique. Patients with cancer were selected by convenience sampling and invited for two mediated virtual meetings in 2022. Twelve outcomes from a systematic review on biosimilars for oncology developed following a protocol were explained in plain language to participants who classified them as critical, important, or not important according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We employed Iramuteq software for lexical categorization of the meeting transcripts, and content analysis for interpretation.

RESULTS

Five women participated (three had metastatic cancer, one non-metastatic, one recurrent). Six outcomes were classified as critical: duration of response, progression-free survival, pathological complete response, overall survival, severe adverse events, and quality of life; three as important: mortality, event-free survival, and objective response; and three as non-important: neutralizing anti-drug antibody, any adverse event, and non-neutralizing anti-drug antibody. Duration of response, pathological complete response, severe adverse events, and quality of life were considered secondary in the review protocol, but critical by the patients. The main themes influencing the importance classification were related to the disease (progression and control) and treatment (recognition and healthcare setting).

CONCLUSION

Patients rated most outcomes as critical or important, some of them previously regarded as secondary by the researchers, which reinforces the need to include stakeholders' perspectives in oncology research. Aspects of the disease progression and treatment effects influenced participants' judgment on outcomes' relevance.

Revisiting the policy ecology framework for implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health settings

BACKGROUND

Over the past three decades, policy actors and actions have been highly influential in supporting the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in mental health settings. An early examination of these actions resulted in the Policy Ecology Framework (PEF), which was originally developed as a tactical primer for state and local mental health regulators in the field of child mental health. However, the policy landscape for implementation has evolved significantly since the original PEF was published. An interrogation of the strategies originally proposed in the PEF is necessary to provide an updated menu of strategies to improve our understanding of the mechanisms of policy action and promote system improvement.

OBJECTIVES

This paper builds upon the original PEF to address changes in the policy landscape for the implementation of mental health EBPs between 2009 and 2022. We review the current state of policy strategies that support the implementation of EBPs in mental health care and outline key areas for policy-oriented implementation research. Our review identifies policy strategies at federal, state, agency, and organizational levels, and highlights developments in the social context in which EBPs are implemented. Furthermore, our review is organized around some key changes that occurred across each PEF domain that span organizational, agency, political, and social contexts along with subdomains within each area.

DISCUSSION

We present an updated menu of policy strategies to support the implementation of EBPs in mental health settings. This updated menu of strategies considers the broad range of conceptual developments and changes in the policy landscape. These developments have occurred across the organizational, agency, political, and social contexts and are important for policymakers to consider in the context of supporting the implementation of EBPs. The updated PEF expands and enhances the specification of policy levers currently available, and identifies policy targets that are underdeveloped (e.g., de-implementation and sustainment) but are becoming visible opportunities for policy to support system improvement. The updated PEF clarifies current policy efforts within the field of implementation science in health to conceptualize and better operationalize the role of policy in the implementation of EBPs.

Integrating consumer perspectives into a large-scale health literacy audit of health information materials: learnings and next steps

BACKGROUND

Health information is less effective when it does not meet the health literacy needs of its consumers. For health organisations, assessing the appropriateness of their existing health information resources is a key step to addressing this issue. This study describes novel methods for a consumer-centred large-scale health literacy audit of existing resources and reflects on opportunities to further refine the method.

METHODS

This audit focused on resources developed by NPS MedicineWise, an Australian not-for-profit that promotes safe and informed use of medicines. The audit comprised 4 stages, with consumers engaged at each stage: 1) Select a sample of resources for assessment; 2) Assess the sample using subjective (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool) and objective (Sydney Health Literacy Lab Health Literacy Editor) assessment tools; 3) Review audit findings through workshops and identify priority areas for future work; 4) Reflect and gather feedback on the audit process via interviews.

RESULTS

Of 147 resources, consumers selected 49 for detailed assessment that covered a range of health topics, health literacy skills, and formats, and which had varied web usage. Overall, 42 resources (85.7%) were assessed as easy to understand, but only 26 (53.1%) as easy to act on. A typical text was written at a grade 12 reading level and used the passive voice 6 times. About one in five words in a typical text were considered complex (19%). Workshops identified three key areas for action: make resources easier to understand and act on; consider the readers' context, needs, and skills; and improve inclusiveness and representation. Interviews with workshop attendees highlighted that audit methods could be further improved by setting clear expectations about the project rationale, objectives, and consumer roles; providing consumers with a simpler subjective health literacy assessment tool, and addressing issues related to diverse representation.

CONCLUSIONS

This audit yielded valuable consumer-centred priorities for improving organisational health literacy with regards to updating a large existing database of health information resources. We also identified important opportunities to further refine the process. Study findings provide valuable practical insights that can inform organisational health actions for the upcoming Australian National Health Literacy Strategy.

Patient and carer involvement in the formulation of research questions: findings from the Italian guideline on palliative care in adults with glioma

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) published the guideline for palliative care (PC) in adults with glioma. The Italian Society of Neurology (SIN), the Italian Association for Neuro-Oncology (AINO), and the Italian Society for Palliative Care (SICP) joined forces to update and adapt this guideline to the Italian context and aimed to involve patients and carers in the formulation of the clinical questions.

METHODS

During semi-structured interviews with glioma patients and focus group meetings (FGMs) with family carers of deceased patients, participants rated the importance of a set of pre-specified intervention topics, shared their experience, and suggested additional topics. Interviews and FGMs were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed (framework and content analysis).

RESULTS

We held 20 interviews and five FGMs (28 carers). Both parties considered the pre-specified topics as important, chiefly information/communication, psychological support, symptoms management, and rehabilitation. Patients aired the impact of focal neurological and cognitive deficits. Carers reported difficulties in dealing with patient's behavior and personality changes and appreciated the preservation of patient's functioning via rehabilitation. Both affirmed the importance of a dedicated healthcare path and patient's involvement in the decision-making process. Carers expressed the need to be educated and supported in their caregiving role.

CONCLUSIONS

Interviews and FGMs were well informative and emotionally challenging. Both parties confirmed the importance of the pre-specified topics, and carers suggested one additional topic: education/support to caregivers. Our findings strengthen the importance of a comprehensive care approach and of addressing the needs of both patients and their family carers.

The nature and impact of patient and public involvement in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research: A systematic review

Patient and public involvement can produce high-quality, relevant research that better addresses the needs of patients and their families. This systematic review investigated the nature and impact of patient and public involvement in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research. Two patient representatives were involved as members of the review team. Databases (Medline, EMBASE, Emcare, Involve Evidence Library) were searched for English-language studies published 1995-March 2022. Titles/abstracts were screened by two reviewers independently. For eligible studies, data were extracted on study characteristics, patient and public involvement (who, when, how, and impact on research outcomes), and reporting quality using the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2-Short Form. Of 4095 articles screened, 58 were eligible. Most research was from the United States (81%) and examined cancer screening or prevention (82%). Community members/organisations/public were the most involved (71%); fewer studies involved patients and/or carers (14%). Over half reported a high-level of involvement (i.e. partner and/or expert involvement), although this declined in later stages of the research cycle, e.g. data analysis. Common positive impacts included improved study design, research methods and recruitment, although most papers (62%) did not describe methods to determine impact. Reporting quality was sub-optimal, largely due to failure to consider challenges. This review found that high-level involvement of patients and the public in cancer prevention, screening and early detection research is feasible and has several advantages. However, improvements are needed to encourage involvement across the research cycle, and in evaluating and reporting its impact.

Health professional involvement in the formulation of research questions: findings from the Italian guideline on palliative care in adults with glioma

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) published the guideline for palliative care in adults with glioma. The Italian Society of Neurology (SIN), the Italian Society for Palliative Care (SICP), and the Italian Association for Neuro-Oncology (AINO) joined forces to update the guideline, and adapt it to the Italian context.

AIM

We involved patients, caregivers, and (herein presented) healthcare professionals (HPs) in the formulation of the guideline clinical questions.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Online survey of Italian HPs experienced in the care of patients with glioma. Participants rated the importance of 14 pre-specified intervention topics on a 0/10 scale and gave their free comments.

RESULTS

Of 244 participants, 149 (61%) were palliative medicine (PM) HPs and 95 Neuro HPs. Their mean age was 48.9 years, 63% were women, and 48% had over 12 years of experience in the care of glioma patients. Physicians were 68%, followed by nurses (28%), psychologists (7%), therapists (3%), and social workers (2%). Most HPs rated the pre-specified topics as important (score ≥ 7) or critical (score ≥ 9), with some differences between PM and Neuro HP groups. There were 58 free comments: 46 (78%) on nine pre-specified topics, and 13 on four new topics, three of which were guideline-pertinent ("caregiver's support and education"; "family physician's training in neuro-oncology"; and "PM HPs' training in neuro-oncology").

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in the survey was high and information-rich, between-group rating differences reflecting HP background. Participants endorsed the 14 intervention topics devised by the guideline panel and identified three additional topics.

The realities and expectations of community involvement in COVID-19 research: a Consumer Reference Group perspective

BACKGROUND

Older adults have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 restrictions such as stay at home orders and physical distancing measures have been implemented to reduce older adults' risk of infection, however, such measures can have negative effects on older adults' mental health and social wellbeing. In 2020, the research team received funding as part of an Australian COVID-19 research grants program to investigate how services can better meet the mental health and social support needs of older adults during COVID-19. A Consumer Reference Group (CRG) was established to provide a community perspective on all research activities.

MAIN BODY

The CRG comprised of eight older adults aged 65 years and older living in Western Australia. Two members of the CRG were involved in the initial grant proposal, and one member worked for a not-for-profit organisation that provides support and advocacy for older adults. The CRGs role was to provide consumer and community perspectives on the research design, advise on study materials, facilitate links between consumers, the community, and researchers, and advocate on behalf of consumers and the community. The CRG was encouraged to reflect on the research project, their contributions, and the outcomes obtained. In this commentary, we document the CRGs contributions to the project, and record their reflections, including what went well, what were some challenges, the realities of conducting research during COVID-19, and lessons learnt.

CONCLUSION

The CRG were active participants in the research process. They shared their perspectives and made important contributions to the project. Through collaboration with the CRG, we were able to reach four key messages, underpinned by consumers lived experiences, that were used to co-develop knowledge translation products. These were disseminated to service providers and older adults.

Perspectives of children and adolescents with cerebral palsy about involvement as research partners: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Children and adolescents with cerebral palsy have diverse needs and often engage with healthcare services, including paediatric rehabilitation. Partnering with these children and adolescents on research projects to inform practice has the potential to ensure services continue to remain relevant and appropriate. This study aimed to identify what children and adolescents with cerebral palsy suggest are effective ways for researchers to involve them as partners in research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This qualitative study was guided by interpretive description. Children and adolescents with cerebral palsy between 8 and 18 years participated in semi-structured, activity-based focus groups or interviews. Verbatim transcripts were coded and analysed using thematic analysis. One member of the research team was a young woman with cerebral palsy.

RESULTS

Seventeen children and adolescents with cerebral palsy from NSW and Victoria (Australia) were involved. Participants were between 8 and 18 years (mean = 12 years), male (n = 11) and female (n = 6). Analysis identified four nested themes: "insider knowledge", "reasons for involvement", "roles in research" and "facilitating partnership".

CONCLUSION

This study identified perspectives of children and adolescents on their involvement as research partners, and considerations for researchers to facilitate involvement of children and adolescents with cerebral palsy as partners in research.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe commitment in healthcare to client-centred practice requires that consumers, including children and young people with cerebral palsy, have opportunities to influence the direction of research which impacts them.Children and young people with cerebral palsy are interested in research partnerships and motivated to be involved in various areas of research.Effective research partnerships with younger populations can be facilitated by researchers acknowledging a child or young person's expertise, and employing strategies relating to open communication, flexibility and support.

National Reforms in Mental Health and Social Care Services: Comparative, Text-Based Explorations of Consumer Involvement and Service Transparency

Consumer involvement and service transparency have, in recent years, become inherent components of policy guiding the provision of public mental health and social care services. The current study wished to deepen insights on these issues, as they unfold in public services reforms in Israel and England, through an examination of key policy documents describing reforms in both countries. The results of this research show the often tacit ways policy can "talk the inclusive talk", but only limitedly "walk the inclusive walk", offering some interesting observations regarding the linkage between involvement and transparency in mental health and social care services.

Embedding consumer and community involvement within an established research centre: moving from general recommendations to an actionable framework

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

Involving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. The National Health and Medical Research Council have provided recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research; however, definitive actions to implement these are not well defined.To address this, an established research centre in Melbourne, Australia, has developed a consumer and community involvement framework to incorporate the national recommendations into their research program. This paper describes the framework the research centre has employed, in the hope that other researchers can adapt this approach and learnings to their own research practices.The framework described in this paper aims to foster partnerships between consumers, community members and researchers, and in doing so, encourages consumers to be actively involved in research to help improve future outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions. Simultaneously, the framework encourages researchers to value the consumer voice in their research to ensure they yield meaningful research outcomes for those living with musculoskeletal conditions.

ABSTRACT

BackgroundThe value of involving consumers and community members in every stage of the research process is gaining recognition as an important consideration in the wider research landscape. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has provided general recommendations for involving consumers and community members in research, although the translation of these recommendations into tangible actions has not yet been well defined. In light of these recommendations, many research institutions are now seeking to incorporate the voices of consumers and community members in their research practices.MethodsThe consumer and community involvement framework described in this paper incorporates the NHMRC's recommendations to produce a four-tiered model where consumer participants nominate their level of involvement depending on their research interests and preferred level of commitment. In ascending order, the tiers are: Consumer Subscriber, Document Reviewer, Research Buddy and Consumer Advocate.The success of this framework depends upon the implementation of effective governance and access to appropriate infrastructure. A Consumer and Community Advisory Group and a designated Consumer and Community Liaison Officer will take responsibility for ensuring appropriate interactions between consumers, researchers, and the research center's executive team. The framework aims to apply suitable support structures in place to manage expectations and minimize barriers to effective involvement, whilst ensuring that consumer contributions are appropriately valued and incorporated in the research.DiscussionInvolving consumers and community members in the research process is an important step towards developing and delivering effective, person-centered health care. While consumer and community involvement offer researchers invaluable perspectives on their research program, it provides an opportunity for consumers and community members to be actively involved in health research and improve the health and wellbeing for those living with health conditions.

The Therapist-assisted Online Parenting Strategies (TOPS) program for parents of adolescents with clinical anxiety or depression: Development and feasibility pilot

OBJECTIVE

To develop a Therapist-assisted Online Parenting Strategies (TOPS) program that is acceptable to parents whose adolescents have anxiety and/or depressive disorders, using a consumer consultation approach.

METHODS

The TOPS intervention was developed via three linked studies. Study 1 involved content analysis of feedback from participants (N = 56) who received a web-based preventive parenting intervention called Partners in Parenting (PiP), as part of a randomised controlled trial. Study 2 involved stakeholder consultations with: (i) parents of adolescents aged 12-17 years (N = 6), and (ii) mental health professionals (N = 28), to identify adaptations to PiP that are required to make it appropriate for parents of adolescents with anxiety and depressive disorders. Study 3 was a pilot of the resulting TOPS program with professionals (N = 10) and a small sample of parents (N = 3) to assess the acceptability of the program content and format that involved online modules and videoconferencing coaching.

RESULTS

Study 1 indicated a need for an enhanced program for parents whose adolescents are experiencing anxiety and depressive disorders, while findings from Study 2 informed the content of the new TOPS program. In Study 3, mental health professionals endorsed the structure and content, while parents affirmed the acceptability of the TOPS program. Feedback from Studies 2 and 3 indicated that the therapist-coach was a valuable resource to (i) provide parents with strategies that are associated with the alleviation of adolescent anxiety and depression, (ii) discuss difficulties in implementing these strategies, (iii) assist parents with overcoming these difficulties; and (iv) support the development of a relapse prevention plan. Professionals felt that the TOPS program would broaden parental knowledge about how to recognise and respond to symptoms of clinical anxiety and depression in their adolescent.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided preliminary support for the feasibility, acceptability and perceived usefulness of the TOPS program.

Beyond cure: patient reported outcomes of hepatitis C treatment among people who inject drugs in Australia

Background

Recent advances in the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection provide the possibility of eliminating HCV as a public health threat. This focus on HCV elimination through treatment, however, is also driving a concomitant focus on ‘achieving cure’ as the primary outcome of treatment. The aim of this paper is to explore what people who inject drugs consider to be important in relation to outcomes of HCV treatment, and whether there are outcomes ‘beyond cure’ that might be important to understand as part of improving engagement in treatment.

Methods

A peer researcher with experience of both HCV treatment and injecting drug use conducted interviews with 24 people in the following groups in Melbourne, Australia: (1) people who had refused or deferred HCV treatment; (2) people who were actively thinking about, planning and/or about to commence HCV treatment; (3) people currently undertaking HCV treatment and (4) people who had recently completed HCV treatment.

Results

The findings show that people who inject drugs are seeking outcomes ‘beyond cure’ including improved physical and mental health, positive changes in identity and social relationships and managing future health and risk. Participants indicated that these other outcomes had not been addressed within their experience of HCV treatment.

Conclusion

While cure is an obvious outcome of HCV treatment, patients are seeking change in other areas of their lives. This study also provides valuable insights for the development of patient-reported measures in this context, which would be an important step towards more patient-centred approaches to HCV treatment.

Patient and public involvement in Paediatric Intensive Care research: considerations, challenges and facilitating factors

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

Paediatric Intensive Care (PIC) provides care to extremely ill children. Research in this area can be difficult because children are often too sick to discuss being involved in a study and parents are too upset about their child to think about taking part. This makes it even more important that research is well designed. We conducted a review of the literature about involving patients and the public (PPI) in PIC research. We wanted to know what PPI has taken place, who had been consulted and how this was undertaken. We reviewed the titles and abstracts of 4717 papers but found only 4 relevant papers. Three of the papers had consulted with parents of children who had been on PIC but only one study had spoken directly to a child themselves. The studies had used a number of different methods to invite people to take part but there did not appear to be one solution. All of the studies thought PPI was good for the development of their research but none of them had tried to measure what had changed as a result. There are difficulties associated with carrying out PPI in the PIC setting. Researchers need to share more of their experiences, positive and negative, so we can try to identify the best ways of carrying out PPI in PIC studies. This will help ensure that research studies are designed which address the needs and concerns of children and their parents.

ABSTRACT

Introduction Involving the public in health care research is reported to enhance the quality, appropriateness, acceptability and relevance to patients and the public (INVOLVE, Briefing notes for researchers, 2012; Staniszewska et al., Int J Technol Assess Health Care 274:391-9, 2011). Conducting research with children and young people is regarded as challenging and this makes it even more important that the research is well designed and understands the perspective of the child and family. We conducted a narrative literature review of the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) literature, in the context of Paediatric Intensive Care (PIC). Our aims were to identify what PPI activity has taken place, with whom researchers engaged and what outcomes they reported. Method Electronic databases Medline, CINAHL and Embase (January 2000- June 2016) were searched using the search terms patient and public involvement and consultation. Participants were defined as child, parent, paediatric or pediatric and the context as intensive or critical care. Papers were excluded where activity reflected 'participants' as research subjects. Included papers were reviewed using the GRIPP checklist to appraise the quality of reporting. Results The search strategy identified 4717 abstracts. Seventeen papers were reviewed in full and four papers were included, all of which are case studies, describing a consultation approach. None of the papers described PPI as a multi-stage process. Only one study engaged with a former PIC patient and the majority of those consulted did not have any PIC experience. Activity was reported as being of benefit but there was no measurement of the impact of PPI. Conclusion There are numerous challenges associated with the conduct of research in PIC. It is therefore essential that the perspective of children, young people and their parents have been considered in the design of trials. However, there are few published accounts of PPI within the PIC context and the accounts that exist highlight issues about who to approach and when, and a lack of clarity about the best ways to engage with them. Research Ethics Committees and funding bodies expect to see evidence of PPI in research applications and we need to develop our understanding of what contributes towards successful PPI in this context.

Models and impact of patient and public involvement in studies carried out by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London: findings from ten case studies

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in studies carried out by the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU) at University College London varies by research type and setting. We developed a series of case studies of PPI to document and share good practice.

METHODS

We used purposive sampling to identify studies representing the scope of research at the MRC CTU and different approaches to PPI. We carried out semi-structured interviews with staff and patient representatives. Interview notes were analysed descriptively to categorise the main aims and motivations for involvement; activities undertaken; their impact on the studies and lessons learned.

RESULTS

We conducted 19 interviews about ten case studies, comprising one systematic review, one observational study and 8 randomised controlled trials in HIV and cancer. Studies were either open or completed, with start dates between 2003 and 2011. Interviews took place between March and November 2014 and were updated in summer 2015 where there had been significant developments in the study (i.e. if the study had presented results subsequent to the interview taking place). A wide range of PPI models, including representation on trial committees or management groups, community engagement, one-off task-focused activities, patient research partners and participant involvement had been used. Overall, interviewees felt that PPI had a positive impact, leading to improvements, for example in the research question; study design; communication with potential participants; study recruitment; confidence to carry out or complete a study; interpretation and communication of results; and influence on future research.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of models of PPI can benefit clinical studies. Researchers should consider different approaches to PPI, based on the desired impact and the people they want to involve. Use of multiple models may increase the potential impacts of PPI in clinical research.

Longitudinal comparative evaluation of the equivalence of an integrated peer-support and clinical staffing model for residential mental health rehabilitation: a mixed methods protocol incorporating multiple stakeholder perspectives

BACKGROUND

A novel staffing model integrating peer support workers and clinical staff within a unified team is being trialled at community based residential rehabilitation units in Australia. A mixed-methods protocol for the longitudinal evaluation of the outcomes, expectations and experiences of care by consumers and staff under this staffing model in two units will be compared to one unit operating a traditional clinical staffing. The study is unique with regards to the context, the longitudinal approach and consideration of multiple stakeholder perspectives.

METHODS/DESIGN

The longitudinal mixed methods design integrates a quantitative evaluation of the outcomes of care for consumers at three residential rehabilitation units with an applied qualitative research methodology. The quantitative component utilizes a prospective cohort design to explore whether equivalent outcomes are achieved through engagement at residential rehabilitation units operating integrated and clinical staffing models. Comparative data will be available from the time of admission, discharge and 12-month period post-discharge from the units. Additionally, retrospective data for the 12-month period prior to admission will be utilized to consider changes in functioning pre and post engagement with residential rehabilitation care. The primary outcome will be change in psychosocial functioning, assessed using the total score on the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). Planned secondary outcomes will include changes in symptomatology, disability, recovery orientation, carer quality of life, emergency department presentations, psychiatric inpatient bed days, and psychological distress and wellbeing. Planned analyses will include: cohort description; hierarchical linear regression modelling of the predictors of change in HoNOS following CCU care; and descriptive comparisons of the costs associated with the two staffing models. The qualitative component utilizes a pragmatic approach to grounded theory, with collection of data from consumers and staff at multiple time points exploring their expectations, experiences and reflections on the care provided by these services.

DISCUSSION

It is expected that the new knowledge gained through this study will guide the adaptation of these and similar services. For example, if differential outcomes are achieved for consumers under the integrated and clinical staffing models this may inform staffing guidelines.

Evaluating public involvement in research design and grant development: Using a qualitative document analysis method to analyse an award scheme for researchers

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS) for Yorkshire and Humber has been running a public involvement funding scheme since 2008. This scheme awards researchers a small amount of money to help them get involvement from patients and/or the public. Involvement activities take place at the time when researchers are planning studies, and when they are completing application forms to request funding for a proposed research project. After the public involvement activities researchers are asked to write a report for the RDS describing what they did with the public involvement funding. This study analysed those reports using an approach which included members of a public involvement panel in the data analysis process. The aim of the work was to see what the views and experiences of researchers who received funding were, and what might be learned for the future of the scheme. Twenty five reports were analysed. Four main themes were identified, these described: the added value of public involvement; aspects to consider when planning and designing public involvement; different roles of public contributors; and aspects of valuing public member contributions. The group approach to analysis was successful in enabling involvement of a variety of individuals in the process. The findings of the study provide evidence of the value of public involvement during the development of applications for research funding. The results also indicate that researchers recognise the variety in potential roles for the public in research, and acknowledge how involvement adds value to studies.

ABSTRACT

Background A regional Research Design Service, funded by the National Institute for Health Research, introduced a small grant in 2008, to support public involvement (often known as patient and public involvement [PPI]) activities during the development of applications for research funding. Successful applicants are requested to submit a report detailing how the grant money was used, including a description of the aims and outcomes of the public involvement activities. The purpose of this study was to analyse the content of these reports. We aimed to find out what researcher views and experiences of public involvement activities were, and what lessons might be learned. Methods We used an innovative method of data analysis, drawing on group participatory approaches, qualitative content analysis, and Framework Analysis to sort and label the content of the reports. We developed a framework of categories and sub-categories (or themes and sub-themes) from this process. Results Twenty five documents were analysed. Four main themes were identified in the data: the added value of public involvement; planning and designing involvement; the role of public members; and valuing public member contributions. Within these themes, sub-themes related to the timing of involvement (prior to the research study/intended during the research study), and also specific benefits of public involvement such as: validating ideas; ensuring appropriate outcomes; ensuring the acceptability of data collection methods/tools and advice regarding research processes. Other sub-themes related to: finding and approaching public members; timing of events; training/support; the format of sessions; setting up public involvement panels: use of public contributors in analysis and interpretation of data; and using public members to assist with dissemination and translation into practice. Conclusions The analysis of reports submitted by researchers following involvement events provides evidence of the value of public involvement during the development of applications for research funding, and details a method for involving members of the public in data analysis which could be of value to other researchers The findings of the analysis indicate recognition amongst researchers of the variety in potential roles for public members in research, and also an acknowledgement of how involvement adds value to studies.

An exploration of the longer-term impacts of community participation in rural health services design

This article explores what happened, over the longer term, after a community participation exercise to design future rural service delivery models, and considers perceptions of why more follow-up actions did or did not happen. The study, which took place in 2014, revisits three Scottish communities that engaged in a community participation research method (2008-2010) intended to design rural health services. Interviews were conducted with 22 citizens, healthcare practitioners, managers and policymakers all of whom were involved in, or knew about, the original project. Only one direct sustained service change was found - introduction of a volunteer first responder scheme in one community. Sustained changes in knowledge were found. The Health Authority that part-funded development of the community participation method, through the original project, had not adopted the new method. Community members tended to attribute lack of further impact to low participation and methods insufficiently attuned to the social nuances of very small rural communities. Managers tended to blame insufficient embedding in the healthcare system and issues around power over service change and budgets. In the absence of convincing formal community governance mechanisms for health issues, rural health practitioners tended to act as conduits between citizens and the Health Authority. The study provides new knowledge about what happens after community participation and highlights a need for more exploration.

'Is it worth doing?' Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement in research

ABSTRACT

Much of the current debate around the impact of patient/public involvement on research focuses on the lack of empirical data. While a number of systematic literature reviews have reported the various ways in which involvement makes a difference to research and the people involved, this evidence has been criticised as being weak and anecdotal. It is argued that robust evidence is still required. This review reflects on the use of quantitative approaches to evaluating impact. It concludes that the statistical evidence is weakened by not paying sufficient attention to the context in which involvement takes place and the way it is carried out. However, if scientific (systematic, quantitative, empirical) approaches are designed in a way to take these factors into account, they might not generate knowledge that is useful beyond the original context. Such approaches might not therefore enhance our understanding of when, why and how involvement makes a difference. In the context of individual research projects where researchers collaborate with patients/the public, researchers often acquire 'new' knowledge about life with a health condition. This new understanding can be described as experiential knowledge-'knowledge in context'-that researchers gain through direct experience of working with patients/the public. On this basis, researchers' accounts of their experience potentially provide a source of insight and learning to influence others, in the same way that the patient experience helps to shape research. These accounts could be improved by increasing the detail provided about context and mechanism. One of the most important contextual factors that influence the outcome of involvement is the researchers themselves and the skills, assumptions, values and priorities they start with. At the beginning of any research project, the researchers 'don't know what they don't know' until they involve patients/the public. This means that the impact of involvement within any particular project is somewhat unpredictable. The answer to the question 'Is involvement worth doing?' will always be 'It depends'. Further exploration of the contextual and mechanistic factors which influence outcomes could give a stronger steer to researchers but may never accurately predict any specific impact.

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

In recent years, there has been considerable interest in finding out what difference patient and public involvement makes to research projects. The evidence published so far has been criticised for being weak and anecdotal. Some people argue we need robust evidence of impact from scientific studies of involvement. In this review, I consider examples of where impact has been measured using statistical methods. I conclude that the statistical evidence is weak, if the studies do not consider the context in which involvement takes place and the way that it is done. Studies designed to take this into account give us more confidence that the involvement did make a difference to that particular project. They do not tell us whether the same impact will occur in the same way in other projects and therefore have limited value. Researchers gain an understanding of involvement through their direct experience of working with patients and the public. This is 'knowledge in context' or 'insight' gained in the same way that patients gain expertise through their direct experience of a health condition. This means that detailed accounts of involvement from researchers already provide valuable learning to others, in the same way that patients' insights help shape research. However, the impact of involvement will always be somewhat unpredictable, because at the start of any project researchers 'don't know what they don't know'-they do not know precisely what problems they might anticipate, until the patients/public tell them.

Offering informed choice about breast screening

Over the last few years, there has been growing international concern about the risk of overdiagnosis in breast screening and about how to communicate this to women. There has also been an increasing policy drive to provide people with information to enable them to make an informed choice about screening. In response to this, a novel approach to developing the information about cancer screening has been adopted in England. This approach has integrated the perspectives of people eligible for screening, and experts in public engagement, informed choice, and communicating risk, as well as experts in screening. New information based on this approach has been provided to women invited for breast screening from September 2013. The new information explicitly sets out the choice to be made, and provides much more detail than previous information about overdiagnosis, the balance of benefits and harms, and the scientific uncertainties. The novel approach has also been adopted to develop new information for the bowel and cervical screening programmes in England, and could provide a model for communicating about cancer screening in other countries.

Engaging Patients in Their Care Versus Obscurantism

PROBLEM

Could engaging patients in their care be a means to oppose obscurantism? Obscurantism is defined by Merriam-Webster as "the practice of keeping knowledge or understanding about something from people".

METHODS

This paper discusses the importance of promoting patient engagement and emphasizes that patients and healthcare providers are equally important stakeholders in health care.

FINDINGS

The discussion occurs in the context of hospital inpatient care as nurses play a critical role in patients' hospitalization experience, including engaging patients in their own care during hospital stays. Paternalism of healthcare providers is recognized as one of the main barriers to integrating the concepts of patient engagement and patient centeredness into every aspect of the care system. Promoting patient engagement is a two-way responsibility, and it requires the cooperation of both patients and healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

As scientists and healthcare providers, we have the duty to counter obscurantism by promoting understanding of the health of individual citizens and society at large. A culture change in healthcare systems toward being patient-centric and placing value on patient engagement is warranted, and this change must come from healthcare providers. Patient-centered tools that support patient engagement, patient portals, or personal health records are still needed.