A co-designed evaluation study to identify Breastfeeding Knowledge of General Practitioners' and Practice Nurses'

The World Health Organization and American Academy of Paediatrics recommend exclusive breastfeeding until 6 months of age, with continued breastfeeding along with complementary solid foods for up to 2 years and beyond. Despite the well-established importance of breastfeeding, Irish rates remain the lowest in Europe. Healthcare professionals' breastfeeding knowledge and skills have a positive impact on increasing breastfeeding rates. There is limited evidence of the knowledge, attitudes or practices of general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs), which is essential to breastfeeding in Ireland. The aim of this study was to evaluate the breastfeeding knowledge, attitudes and practices of GPs and GPNs in one community healthcare organisation (CHO) in Ireland. A co-designed evaluation study was used following low-risk ethical exemption (LS-LR-22-161). A modified version of a validated breastfeeding questionnaire was developed. A Project Steering Committee was established that included patient, and public involvement stakeholders. The anonymised survey was distributed via online Qualtrics platform (November 2022-February 2023). STROBE Guidelines were utilised. The overall response rate was 25.9% (n = 121) and valid responses were reported in the article. The total population size was n = 468 (GPs n = 290 and GPNs n = 178). Our pilot study identified that 42.7% (n = 47/110) of respondents never attended a breastfeeding education programme, and 53.9% (n = 55/102) identified that their knowledge could be improved. The majority of respondents, 92.9% (n = 92/99) wish to complete further education in breastfeeding. The results of this pilot study in one CHO in Ireland indicate a gap in knowledge and a need for specific breastfeeding and lactation theoretical and skills training for GPs and GPNs working in primary care to support, promote and protect breastfeeding.

'It is still coming from the centre and coming out': The material conditions adding to over-bureaucratised patient and public involvement for commissioning health and care in England

OBJECTIVE

To understand how materiality affects patient and public involvement (PPI) for commissioning and leading health and care services in the English National Health Service (NHS) context.

CONTEXT

From April 2013 groups of general practitioners (GPs) became members of NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to assess needs and procure core health services for and with local communities. Since July 2022, integrated care systems (ICSs) have subsumed this responsibility. NHS reorganisations have been driven by the promise of more effective and efficient health care and have led to a long history of PPI on economic, political, and moral grounds. Few studies researching PPI in clinical commissioning exist and fewer still have explored a more agentic understanding of materiality and its impact on PPI.

STUDY DESIGN

A focused ethnography was used to examine PPI for clinical commissioning within two CCG case study sites in England. Three CCG Governing Body lay representatives, nine GP commissioners and seven service user representatives took part in focus groups and/or were interviewed. Fifteen nonparticipant observations were also carried out at CCG meetings and the associated materiality was examined.

FINDINGS

The materiality of activities involved in clinical commissioning influences and shapes the nature of PPI. These forms of materiality may dilute and subvert meaningful engagement and involvement that relies on trust, leadership, learning, and partnership working.

CONCLUSION

System leaders in ICSs should consider the significance of materiality in centrally driven processes involved in PPI commissioning to reduce barriers and ensure meaningful partnerships within local communities.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The study design ensured PPI throughout the research process in keeping with contemporary research practice guidance. The project steering committee included service users with current or recent PPI clinical commissioning experience outside of the study sites. There was PPI involvement in the original study proposal and its development including the bid for doctoral funds on which this study is based. All were involved in assessing the rigour of the data collection, interpretation of the findings and ensuring the project remained true to the aims of the study. Two members have also participated in presentation of the study findings.

[Application of "patient and public involvement" in acupuncture clinical research]

In order to explore the application of "patient and public involvement" (PPI) in acupuncture clinical research, the connotation, reporting standards and research status of PPI at home and abroad are collated, and the key problems of PPI encountered in acupuncture clinical research are deeply considered and summarized. It is suggested that the short-form checklist of the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) of the 2nd edition should be applied to acupuncture clinical research. PPI provides a new perspective for acupuncture clinical research. It is beneficial for each stage of research, contributes to the improvement of acupuncture medical service mode and increases the success rate and cost-effectiveness of research so that the innovation and development of acupuncture science can be promoted.

Toward recovery in schizophrenia: Current concepts, findings, and future research directions

Schizophrenia was initially defined as "dementia praecox" by E. Kraepelin, which implies progressive deterioration. However, recent studies have revealed that early effective intervention may lead to social and functional recovery in schizophrenia. In this review, we provide an overview of current concepts in schizophrenia and pathophysiological hypotheses. In addition, we present recent findings from clinical and basic research on schizophrenia. Recent neuroimaging and neurophysiological studies have consistently revealed specific biological differences in the structure and function of the brain in those with schizophrenia. From a basic research perspective, to determine the essential pathophysiology underlying schizophrenia, it is crucial that findings from all lines of inquiry-induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived neural cells from patients, murine models expressing genetic mutations identified in patients, and patient clinical data-be integrated to contextualize the analysis results. However, the findings remain insufficient to serve as a diagnostic tool or a biomarker for predicting schizophrenia-related outcomes. Collaborations to conduct clinical research based on the patients' and their families' values are just beginning, and further development is expected.

Transformation Beyond COVID-19: Accessibility in Lived Experience Involvement in Research Post Pandemic. Experience, Reflections and Future Direction From the Closing the Gap Network and OWLS Study

Research literature published during the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the loss of involvement opportunities for people with lived experience during the pandemic as well as the vital role lived experience advisors play at all times, including highlighting unseen aspects of the impacts of crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, researchers from the Closing the Gap Network (CtG) at the University of York worked to expand and diversify patient and public involvement (PPI) whist working on a study exploring the impact of the pandemic and associated restrictions on those with the most severe forms of mental ill health. CtG had a strong record of patient and public involvement pre-pandemic and researchers wanted to ensure that this continued during the pandemic. This paper describes the experience of lived experience involvement during the pandemic from multiple perspectives and makes recommendations for future involvement models, accessibility and recommendations for future research.

Person-based co-design of a decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer

Background

People with genetic predispositions to cancer are faced with complex health decisions about managing their risk. Decision aids can support informed, values-based decisions, alongside shared decision-making with a clinician. Whilst diagnoses of genetic predispositions to cancer are increasing, there is no scalable decision aid to support these people. This paper presents an accessible, relevant decision aid template which can be adapted for different predispositions to cancer.

Methods

The decision aid template was co-developed with 12 patients affected by cancer and informed by empirical and theoretical literature. In addition, consultations were conducted with a further 19 people with Lynch syndrome; a specific genetic predisposition to cancer. Clinical stakeholders were consulted regularly. Coulter's framework for decision aid development guided the process, and these activities were complemented by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, and the latest evidence on communicating risk in decision aids. Programme theory was developed to hypothesise how the decision aid would support decision-making and contextual factors which could influence the process. Guiding principles co-developed with the patient panel described how the decision aid could effectively engage people.

Results

The in-depth co-design process led to the identification of five core components of an accessible decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer: defining the decision; option grid showing implications of each option; optional further details such as icon arrays to show tailored risk and personal narratives; values clarification activity; and a summary to facilitate discussion with a clinician. Specific guidance was produced describing how to develop each component. The guiding principles identified that the decision aid template needed to promote trust, reduce distress, and be comprehensive, personally relevant and accessible in order to engage people.

Conclusion

Adopting a co-design process helped ensure that the decision aid components were relevant and accessible to the target population. The template could have widespread application through being adapted for different genetic predispositions. The exact content should be co-designed with people from diverse backgrounds with lived experience of the specific predisposition to ensure it is as useful, engaging and relevant as possible.

'A limpet on a ship': Spatio-temporal dynamics of patient and public involvement in research

Objective

To understand how current funding expectations that applied health research is undertaken in partnership with research institutions, health service providers and other stakeholders may impact on patient and public involvement (PPI).

Background

While there is considerable research on the potential impact of PPI in health research, the processes of embedding PPI in research teams remain understudied. We draw on anthropological research on meetings as sites of production and reproduction of institutional cultures and external contexts to investigate how these functions of meetings may affect the potential contributions of patients, carers and the public in research.

Methods

We present an ethnography of meetings that draws from a larger set of case studies of PPI in applied health research settings. The study draws on ethnographic observations, interviews with team members, analysis of documents and a presentation of preliminary findings through which feedback from informants was gathered.

Results

We identified four means by which the oversight meetings regulated research and constrained the possibilities for PPI: a logic of ‘deliverables’ and imagined interlocutors, the performance of inclusion, positioning PPI in an ‘elsewhere’ of research, and the use of meetings to embed apprenticeship for junior researchers.

Conclusions

PPI is essentially out of sync from the institutional logic of ‘deliverables’ constituting research partnerships. Embedding PPI in research requires challenging this logic.

Are People with Aphasia (PWA) Involved in the Creation of Quality of Life and Aphasia Impact-Related Questionnaires? A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Quality of Life (QoL) questionnaires are used to describe the impact of aphasia on stroke survivors' life. People with aphasia (PWA) are traditionally excluded from research, potentially leading to a mismatch between the factors chosen in the tools and the realistic needs of PWA. The purpose of this review was to determine the direct involvement of PWA in the creation of QoL and aphasia impact-related questionnaires (AIR-Qs).

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was conducted by an expert librarian and two independent reviewers on health sciences based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) protocol, through a literature search in five databases: Medline Complete, PubMed, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Search terms included 'stroke', 'people with aphasia', 'communication', 'well-being', and 'quality of life'.

RESULTS

Of 952 results, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria. Of these, only four AIR-Qs studies (20%) were found reporting the direct involvement of PWA, while no QoL tools did so. Evidence showed involvement in the creation phase of AIR-Q, mainly in a consultation role.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an absence of a framework for conducting and reporting the involvement of PWA in qualitative participatory research studies, which limits effectiveness to promote equitable best practice in aphasia rehabilitation.

Adding to the knowledge on Patient and Public Involvement: Reflections from an experience of co-research with carers of people with dementia

Background

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research ensures that publicly funded research reflects the priorities of the people who will be affected by its results. Co‐research, a branch of PPI, is equal partnership between academic researchers and members of the public, who steer and conduct research together.

Objectives

To propose a model for good practice in co‐researching with carers of people with dementia, by reporting and synthesizing the personal reflections of the academic and lay researchers around the methodological issues, benefits, and challenges of co‐research.

Design

An academic researcher and two lay researchers with lived experience of caring with someone with dementia collaborated in all stages of a qualitative research study, including development of the research protocol and topic guide, data collection, analysis and synthesis, and dissemination of findings. Throughout the study, the academic and lay researchers annotated reflections of their experience in personal diaries. Data from the diaries were synthesized and mapped out in a model for good practice in co‐research.

Results

Co‐research yielded benefits for all those involved and on research outputs. There were practicalities and challenges that required extra resources, in order to make the involvement of lay researchers meaningful and effective.

Discussion

The model for good practice illustrates overarching and stage‐specific guidelines, which can inform researchers and members of the public wishing to undertake good practice in co‐research.

A Preliminary Investigation of the Views of People With Parkinson's (With and Without Psychosis) and Caregivers on Participating in Clinical Trials During the Covid-19 Pandemic: An Online Survey

Background: The coronavirus pandemic is having a profound impact on non-COVID-19 related research, including the delivery of clinical trials for patients with Parkinson's disease. Objectives: A preliminary investigation to explore the views of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, with and without experience of psychosis symptoms, and carers on the resumption of clinical research and adaptations to trials in light of COVID-19. Methods: An anonymous self-administered online survey was completed by 30 PD patients and six family members/carers via the Parkinson's UK Research Support Network to explore current perceptions on taking part in PD research and how a planned clinical trial for psychosis in PD may be adapted so participants feel safe. Results: Ninety-one percent of respondents were enthusiastic about the continuation of non-COVID-19 related research as long as certain safety measures were in place. Ninety-four percent stated that they would be happy to complete assessments virtually. However, they noted that care should be taken to ensure that this does not exclude participants, particularly those with more advanced PD who may require assistance using portable electronic devices. Regular and supportive communication from the research team was also seen as important for maintaining the psychological well-being of participants while taking part in the trial. Conclusions: In the era of COVID-19 pandemic, standard approaches will have to be modified and rapid adoption of virtual assessments will be critical for the continuation of clinical research. It is important that alongside the traditional methods, new tools are developed, and older ones validated for virtual assessments, to allow safe and comprehensive assessments vital for ongoing research in people with Parkinson's.

Role of patient and public involvement in implementation research: a consensus study

Background

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is often an essential requirement for research funding. Distinctions can be drawn between clinical research, which generally focuses on patients, and implementation research, which generally focuses on health professional behaviour. There is uncertainty about the role of PPI in this latter field. We explored and defined the roles of PPI in implementation research to inform relevant good practice guidance.

Methods

We used a structured consensus process using a convenience sample panel of nine experienced PPI and two researcher members. We drew on available literature to identify 21 PPI research roles. The panel rated their agreement with roles independently online in relation to both implementation and clinical research. Disagreements were discussed at a face-to-face meeting prior to a second online rating of all roles. Median scores were calculated and a final meeting held to review findings and consider recommendations.

Results

Ten panellists completed the consensus process. For clinical research, there was strong support and consensus for the role of PPI throughout most of the research process. For implementation research, there were eight roles with consensus and strong support, seven roles with consensus but weaker support and six roles with no consensus. There were more disagreements relating to PPI roles in implementation research compared with clinical research. PPI was rated as contributing less to the design and management of implementation research than for clinical research.

Conclusions

The roles of PPI need to be tailored according to the nature of research to ensure authentic and appropriate involvement. We provide a framework to guide the planning, conduct and reporting of PPI in implementation research, and encourage further research to evaluate its use.