Partizipative Gesundheitsforschung – ein neuer Ansatz für die Präventionsforschung

Rethinking a Traditional Method of Participation: “Town-Hall Meetings” to Support Family Carers of People with Dementia

A growing number of people with dementia, a simultaneous decline of professional caregivers, and changing family structures clearly illustrate the societal relevance of the question of how dementia care can be arranged and delivered in the future. The demand for innovative solutions especially to support family carers requires a deeper insight into their life situation and a focused perception of their needs. This article presents the main hypothesis that specific forms of social integration and participation based on an equal dialogue between family caregivers, the public, and policymakers is needed to achieve that. Therefore, the main point here is to give family caregivers of people with dementia a voice to learn how to better support them in caring as well as self-care. A learning process triggered by a dialogue might result in a higher level of community readiness to implement new forms of support or social innovations. The hypothesis will be supported by John Dewey’s theory of political and democratic learning and the model of transformative learning according to Jack Mezirow indicating that learning particularly succeeds in interpersonal communication. In this context, the Town-Hall Meeting method and its potential to promote interpersonal communication and reflexive learning is discussed. The article addresses an important debate, namely that of how dementia care and support of family carers can succeed. It also sets the direction for future empirical research as the Town-Hall Meeting method might be applicable for gerontological action and participatory research.

[Patient and public involvement (PPI) in palliative care research]

BACKGROUND

Patient and public participation in health research is of increasing social importance. The participation of citizens (patients, their next or interested parties) is not yet structurally anchored in Germany. This manuscript aims to present and to discuss first experiences with patient and public involvement in two palliative care centers.

METHODS

In two centers, a general patient and public involvement committee (Erlangen) and a project-associated patient and public involvement group (Munich) were founded. Strategies for recruitment of potential members (public lectures, personal contact, information on the website, leaflets) were developed and applied. Sociodemographic data and motivations were assessed using survey and personal communication. 18 months after foundation citizens were asked to give feedback on participation during personal meetings.

RESULTS

The 20 members of the PPI committee (14 female) are between 52 and 86 years old in Erlangen. The PPI group in Munich has 7 members (5 female). Motivations to contribute are, for example, gratefulness for the care of a relative or the wish to share occupational competencies for a good purpose. Voluntary participation took place by consulting the research teams. Consultation was, among others, performed in joint sessions with brainstorming, moderated group discussions, piloting and commenting interview guides, texts or website content. Participation improved the quality of study material and data assessment instruments. Citizens appreciated that they were able to gain new information and meet people from different fields. They partly wished there was a more detailed preparation and debriefing after joint meetings. The research teams did not quantify the considerable staff and time expenses.

DISCUSSION

The recruitment strategies used have proved successful, and the experiences so far indicate a positive impact of PPI on research in the field of palliative care. Research is needed to evaluate the resources required and the effect of PPI in palliative care. On a structural level, discussion of PPI as one specification of voluntary engagement in palliative care, centralized provision of general information on PPI in palliative care and the possibilities of exchange between PPI groups and researchers of different facilities, should take place.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for networking and exchange among researchers and citizens of different project groups with experience in PPI. An institutionalized provision of expertise would pave the way for PPI in palliative research.

[Consulting or engaging? The role of stakeholders in health research. A conference report by the organizers]

Increasingly, researchers are required to engage stakeholders in health-related research projects. "Stakeholder" in this context are those people who may be directly or indirectly affected by the planned research or the research object. This could be, for example, patients, relatives, and health personnel, but also political decision-makers. Those conducting stakeholder engagement are faced with many open questions like what activities are meant by engagement, for what purpose researchers should engage stakeholders, who should be involved, or how best to design engagement activities.From 28 to 29 March 2019 the interdisciplinary conference "Consulting or Engaging? The Role of Stakeholders in Health Research" took place at LMU Munich. The aim of the conference was to facilitate cross-disciplinary discourse on research engagement of various stakeholder groups. Different application contexts were examined, such as public health research, clinical research, health services research, and bioethical deliberation.This conference report structures and explains the main topics discussed during the conference from the perspective of the organizers. It thereby addresses the question of inclusivity and exclusivity of frequently used terms for stakeholder engagement, reflects on different strategies for justifying stakeholder engagement, and provides an overview of different approaches to stakeholder engagement as well as of methodological and practical challenges in implementing engagement activities.