How a Power Differential Between Clinicians and Researchers Contributes to the Research-to-Practice Gap

Harmonising outcome measurement for child focused domestic abuse interventions. Reflections on the development and implementation of a core outcome set

There is appetite in the UK to better measure the impact of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) interventions on children. The spread of outcomes-based commissioning means outcome measurement is no longer just the territory of academic researchers but is now firmly within the purview of practitioners and policy makers. However, outcomes measured in trials only partially represent the views of those delivering and using services with respect to how success should be defined and captured. Even within trials there is huge inconsistency in the definition and measurement of important endpoints. This yields a body of evidence that is difficult to make sense of, defeating the ends for which it was produced - to improve the response to children and families who have experienced abuse. Development of Core Outcome Sets (COS) is seen as a solution to this problem, by establishing consensus across key stakeholder groups regarding a minimum standard for outcome measurement in trials, and increasingly in service delivery contexts. To date COS development has addressed outcomes relating to health conditions or interventions, with limited application to public health challenges. We reflect on our efforts to develop a COS to evaluate psychosocial interventions for children and families experiencing DVA. We highlight the value of COS development as a mechanism for improving evidence quality and the response to families experiencing abuse. Finally, we make recommendations to researchers and COS guideline developers to support this broader application of COS methodology.

Memory and Traumatic Brain Injury: Assessment and Management Practices of Speech-Language Pathologists

PURPOSE

Memory impairments are among the most commonly reported deficits and among the most frequent rehabilitation targets for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Memory and learning are also critical for rehabilitation success and broader long-term outcomes. Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) play a central role in memory management for individuals with TBI across the continuum of care. Yet, little is known about the current practice patterns of SLPs for post-TBI memory disorders. This study aims to examine the clinical management of memory disorders in adults with TBI by SLPs and identify opportunities to improve post-TBI memory outcomes.

METHOD

SLPs from across the continuum of care were recruited to complete an online survey. The survey assessed key practice areas specific to memory and memory disorders post-TBI, including education and training, knowledge and confidence, and assessment and treatment patterns.

RESULTS

Surveys from 155 SLPs were analyzed. Results revealed that TBI-specific training remains low in the field. Respondents varied in their practice patterns in assessing and treating memory disorders. Most SLPs do not appear to have access to appropriate standardized assessments to measure unique forms of memory. Respondents also reported a range of barriers and opportunities to advance memory outcomes following TBI and provided suggestions of areas in which they would like to see more basic and clinical research.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings establish a baseline of the current practices for clinical management of memory impairment in adults with TBI by SLPs. Improved opportunities for clinician training, the development of a single tool to assess multiple forms of memory, better access to existing memory assessments, and implementation of evidence-based interventions promise to lead to improved memory outcomes for individuals with TBI.

Strategies for expanding patient and public involvement into under-served head and neck cancer communities

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we discuss two case studies in which we summarize the process of expanding patient and public involvement (PPI) representation specific to the head and neck cancer population, highlighting the challenges and successes within each project. The first case study reports on the expansion of HaNC PPI membership, a long-established PPI forum which supports Liverpool Head and Neck Centre research. The second case study describes the establishment of a novel palliative care network in head and neck cancer in the North of England, in which PPI was central to the project's success.

RECENT FINDINGS

Whilst recognizing diversity is important, it is imperative to acknowledge the contribution of existing members. Engagement with clinicians to reduce issues of gatekeeping is essential. A central theme is that the development of sustainable relationships is critical.

SUMMARY

The case studies highlight the challenge of identifying and accessing such a diverse population, particularly in the context of palliative care. Successful PPI is dependent on building and maintaining relationship with PPI members, ensuring flexibility in terms of timing, platforms and venues. Relationships formation should not be restricted to the academic-PPI representative dyad but should consider both clinical-academic and community partnerships to ensure those who are part of under-served communities are afforded the opportunities to become involved in research.