The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation

BACKGROUND

The SlowMo study demonstrated the effects of SlowMo, an eight-session digitally supported reasoning intervention, on paranoia in a large-scale randomized-controlled trial with 362 participants with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis.

AIM

The current evaluation aimed to investigate the impact of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in the SlowMo study.

METHOD

PPI members were six women and three men from Sussex, Oxford and London with experience of using mental health services for psychosis. They received training and met at least 3-monthly throughout the project. The impact of PPI was captured quantitatively and qualitatively through (i) a PPI log of recommendations and implementation; (ii) written subjective experiences of PPI members; (iii) meeting minutes; and (iv) outputs produced.

RESULTS

The PPI log revealed 107 recommendations arising from PPI meetings, of which 87 (81%) were implemented. Implementation was greater for recruitment-, data collection- and organization-related actions than for dissemination and emergent innovations. Qualitative feedback revealed impacts on study recruitment, data collection, PPI participants' confidence, knowledge, career aspirations and society more widely. Outputs produced included a film about psychosis that aired on BBC primetime television, novel webpages and journal articles. Barriers to PPI impact included geography, travel, funding, co-ordination and well-being.

DISCUSSION

A future challenge for PPI impact will be the extent to which peer innovation (innovative PPI-led ideas) can be supported within research study delivery.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Planned Patient and Public Contribution in SlowMo comprised consultation and collaboration in (i) design, (ii) recruitment, (iii) qualitative interviews and analysis of service users' experiences of SlowMo therapy and (iv) dissemination.

Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"

Legitimacy of deliberation processes leading to recommendations for public financing or clinical practice depends on the data considered, stakeholders involved and the process by which both of these are selected and organised. Oortwijn et al provides an interesting exploration of processes currently in place in health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. However, agencies are struggling with core issues central to their legitimacy that goes beyond the procedural exploration of Oortwijn et al, such as: how processes reflect the mission and values of the agencies? How they ensure that recommendations are fair and reasonable? Which role should be given to public and patient involvement? Do agencies have a positive impact on the healthcare system and the populations served? What are the drivers of their evolution? We concur with Culyer commentary on the need of learning from doing what works best and that a reflection is indeed needed to "enhance the fairness and legitimacy of HTA."

Self-Medication for Chronic Pain Using Classic Psychedelics: A Qualitative Investigation to Inform Future Research

Background: Chronic Pain is among the leading causes of disability worldwide with up to 60% of patients suffering from comorbid depression. Psychedelic-assisted therapy has recently been found effective in treating a host of mental health issues including depression and has historically been found to be useful in treating pain. Reports of self-medication for chronic pain using psychedelic drugs have been widely documented, with anecdotal evidence indicating widespread success in a range of pathologies. Aims: In preparation for an upcoming trial, to better understand how those with lived experience of chronic pain self-medicate with psychedelic drugs, and to establish, in detail, their therapeutic protocols and practices for success. Methods: As part of patient-involvement (PI) for an upcoming trial in this population, 11 individuals who reported self-medicating with psychedelic drugs took part in a 1-h semi-structured discussion, which was then transcribed and thematically analyzed. Results: Across a range of psychedelic substances and doses, reported pain scores improved substantially during and after psychedelic experiences. Two processes, Positive Reframing and Somatic Presence, were reliably identified as playing a role in improvements in mental wellbeing, relationship with pain, and physical (dis)comfort. Inclusion of other strategies such as mindfulness, breathwork, and movement were also widely reported. Due to the data's subjective nature, this paper is vulnerable to bias and makes no claims on causality or generalisability. Together, these results have been used to inform study design for a forthcoming trial. Conclusion: This pre-trial PI work gives us confidence to test psychedelic therapy for chronic pain in a forthcoming controlled trial. The results presented here will be instrumental in improving our ability to meet the needs of future study participants.

Development of an intervention to facilitate implementation and uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening

BACKGROUND

'Implementation interventions' refer to methods used to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical interventions such as diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS). DRS is effective, yet uptake is often suboptimal. Despite most routine management taking place in primary care and the central role of health care professionals (HCP) in referring to DRS, few interventions have been developed for primary care. We aimed to develop a multifaceted intervention targeting both professionals and patients to improve DRS uptake as an example of a systematic development process combining theory, stakeholder involvement, and evidence.

METHODS

First, we identified target behaviours through an audit in primary care of screening attendance. Second, we interviewed patients (n = 47) and HCP (n = 30), to identify determinants of uptake using the Theoretical Domains Framework, mapping these to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to develop intervention content. Thirdly, we conducted semi-structured consensus groups with stakeholders, specifically users of the intervention, i.e. patients (n = 15) and HCPs (n = 16), regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and local relevance of selected BCTs and potential delivery modes. We consulted representatives from the national DRS programme to check intervention 'fit' with existing processes. We applied the APEASE criteria (affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, side effects, and equity) to select the final intervention components, drawing on findings from the previous steps, and a rapid evidence review of operationalised BCT effectiveness.

RESULTS

We identified potentially modifiable target behaviours at the patient (consent, attendance) and professional (registration) level. Patient barriers to consent/attendance included confusion between screening and routine eye checks, and fear of a negative result. Enablers included a recommendation from friends/family or professionals and recognising screening importance. Professional barriers to registration included the time to register patients and a lack of readily available information on uptake in their local area/practice. Most operationalised BCTs were acceptable to patients and HCPs while the response to feasibility varied. After considering APEASE, the core intervention, incorporating a range of BCTs, involved audit/feedback, electronic prompts targeting professionals, HCP-endorsed reminders (face-to-face, by phone and letter), and an information leaflet for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the example of an intervention to improve DRS uptake, this study illustrates an approach to integrate theory with user involvement. This process highlighted tensions between theory-informed and stakeholder suggestions, and the need to apply the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)/BCT structure flexibly. The final intervention draws on the trusted professional-patient relationship, leveraging existing services to enhance implementation of the DRS programme. Intervention feasibility in primary care will be evaluated in a randomised cluster pilot trial.

An emerging framework for fully incorporating public involvement (PI) into patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in the United Kingdom (UK) and internationally to report and monitor patients’ subjective assessments of their symptoms and functional status and also their quality of life. Whilst the importance of involving the public in PROM development to increase the quality of the developed PROM has been highlighted this practice is not widespread. There is a lack of guidance on how public involvement (PI) could be embedded in the development of PROMs, where the roles can be more complex than in other types of research. This paper provides a timely review and sets out an emerging framework for fully incorporating PI into PROM development.

Community Psychology as a Process of Citizen Participation in Health Policy Comment on "The Rise of Post-truth Populism in Pluralist Liberal Democracies: Challenges for Health Policy"

This brief commentary discusses a recent paper by Speed and Mannion that explores "The Rise of post truth populism in liberal democracies: challenges for health policy." It considers their assertion that through meaningful democratic engagement in health policy, some of the risks brought about by an exclusionary populist politics can be mediated. With an overview of what participation means in modern healthcare policy and implementation, the field of community psychology is presented as one way to engage marginalized groups at risk of exploitation or exclusion by nativist populist policy.

Using cognitive pre-testing methods in the development of a new evidenced-based pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument

Background

Variation in development methods of Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Instruments has led to inconsistent inclusion of risk factors and concerns about content validity. A new evidenced-based Risk Assessment Instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary Or Secondary Evaluation Tool - PURPOSE-T was developed as part of a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funded Pressure Ulcer Research Programme (PURPOSE: RP-PG-0407-10056). This paper reports the pre-test phase to assess and improve PURPOSE-T acceptability, usability and confirm content validity.

Methods

A descriptive study incorporating cognitive pre-testing methods and integration of service user views was undertaken over 3 cycles comprising PURPOSE-T training, a focus group and one-to-one think-aloud interviews. Clinical nurses from 2 acute and 2 community NHS Trusts, were grouped according to job role. Focus group participants used 3 vignettes to complete PURPOSE-T assessments and then participated in the focus group. Think-aloud participants were interviewed during their completion of PURPOSE-T.

After each pre-test cycle analysis was undertaken and adjustment/improvements made to PURPOSE-T in an iterative process. This incorporated the use of descriptive statistics for data completeness and decision rule compliance and directed content analysis for interview and focus group data. Data were collected April 2012-June 2012.

Results

Thirty-four nurses participated in 3 pre-test cycles. Data from 3 focus groups, 12 think-aloud interviews incorporating 101 PURPOSE-T assessments led to changes to improve instrument content and design, flow and format, decision support and item-specific wording. Acceptability and usability were demonstrated by improved data completion and appropriate risk pathway allocation. The pre-test also confirmed content validity with clinical nurses.

Conclusions

The pre-test was an important step in the development of the preliminary PURPOSE-T and the methods used may have wider instrument development application. PURPOSE-T proposes a new approach to pressure ulcer risk assessment, incorporating a screening stage, the inclusion of skin status to distinguish between those who require primary prevention and those who require secondary prevention/treatment and the use of colour to support pathway allocation and decision making. Further clinical evaluation is planned to assess the reliability and validity of PURPOSE-T and it’s impact on care processes and patient outcomes.

Consumers or Citizens? Whose Voice Will Healthwatch Represent and Will It Matter? Comment on "Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England"

Efforts to achieve effective and meaningful patient and public involvement (PPI) in healthcare have existed for nearly a century, albeit with limited success. This brief commentary discusses a recent paper by Carter and Martin exploring the "Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England," and places these challenges in the context of the broader struggle to give a voice to healthcare consumers and citizens. With an overview of what can go right and—perhaps more importantly—what can go wrong, the question remains: will Healthwatch—and other PPI efforts in healthcare—represent the voice of consumers or citizens and will it matter?

Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England

This article engages with debates about the conceptualisation and practical challenges of patient and public involvement (PPI) in health and social care services. Policy in this area in England has shifted numerous times but increasingly a consumerist discourse seems to override more democratic ideas concerning the relationship between citizens and public services. Recent policy change in England has seen the creation of new consumer champion bodies in the form of local Healthwatch. The article describes these new organisational structures for PPI and shows how those who seek to influence planning and delivery of services or comment or complain about aspects of their care face considerable complexity. This is due, in part, to the ambiguous remit set out for newly instigated Healthwatch organisations by government. Drawing on governance theory, we show that it can also be understood as a function of an increasingly polycentric governance arena. Challenges that flow from this include problems of specifying jurisdictional responsibility, accountability, and legitimacy. We review Healthwatch progress to date, then we set out four challenges facing local Healthwatch organisations before discussing the implications of these for patients and the public. The first challenge relates to non-coterminous boundaries and jurisdictional integrity. Secondly, establishing the unique features of Healthwatch is problematic in the crowded PPI arena. The third challenge arises from limited resources as well as the fact that resources flow to Healthwatch from the local authorities that Healthwatch are expected to hold to account. The fourth challenge we identify is how local Healthwatch organisations negotiate the complexity of being a partner to statutory and other organisations, while at the same time being expected to champion local people's views.