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

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation Position Statement on Research and Patient Involvement

BACKGROUND

Heart Failure (HF) is a growing global public health problem affecting approximately 64 million people worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation developed a position statement to advocate for adult patients with HF to be an active participant in research and for HF leaders to integrate patients throughout the research process.

METHODS

A review of the literature and best practices was conducted. Based on the evidence, the HF Patient Foundation made recommendations regarding the inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process.

RESULTS

Healthcare clinicians, researchers and funding agencies have a role to ensure rigorous quality research is performed and implemented into practice. Inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process can improve the lives of patients and families while advancing HF science.

CONCLUSIONS

The HF Patient Foundation strongly advocates that patients with HF be involved in research from inception of the project through dissemination of findings to improve patient outcomes.

Wearable wireless continuous vital signs monitoring on the general ward

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Wearable wireless sensors for continuous vital signs monitoring (CVSM) offer the potential for early identification of patient deterioration, especially in low-intensity care settings like general wards. This study aims to review advances in wearable CVSM - with a focus on the general ward - highlighting the technological characteristics of CVSM systems, user perspectives and impact on patient outcomes by exploring recent evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

The accuracy of wearable sensors measuring vital signs exhibits variability, especially notable in ambulatory patients within hospital settings, and standard validation protocols are lacking. Usability of CMVS systems is critical for nurses and patients, highlighting the need for easy-to-use wearable sensors, and expansion of the number of measured vital signs. Current software systems lack integration with hospital IT infrastructures and workflow automation. Imperative enhancements involve nurse-friendly, less intrusive alarm strategies, and advanced decision support systems. Despite observed reductions in ICU admissions and Rapid Response Team calls, the impact on patient outcomes lacks robust statistical significance.

SUMMARY

Widespread implementation of CVSM systems on the general ward and potentially outside the hospital seems inevitable. Despite the theoretical benefits of CVSM systems in improving clinical outcomes, and supporting nursing care by optimizing clinical workflow efficiency, the demonstrated effects in clinical practice are mixed. This review highlights the existing challenges related to data quality, usability, implementation, integration, interpretation, and user perspectives, as well as the need for robust evidence to support their impact on patient outcomes, workflow and cost-effectiveness.

Understanding engagement in diet and dementia prevention research among British South Asians: a short report of findings from a patient and public involvement group

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a global public health challenge. Evidence suggests that individuals from South Asian communities are an at-risk group for dementia, partly as a result of early and cumulative exposure to known dementia risk factors, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. There needs to be more culturally appropriate community engagement to increase awareness of dementia and identify better strategies to encourage participation in dementia-related research.

METHODS

We aimed to better understand the barriers and facilitators towards engaging with, and participating in, diet and dementia related research among British South Asians. This was achieved using a public and patient involvement (PPI) approach. A community-based, engagement event involving information sharing from experts and roundtable discussions with South Asian communities (n = 26 contributors) was held in June 2023 in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK. Collaboration from preidentified PPI representatives (n = 3) informed the content and structure of PPI activities, as well as recruitment. Data were synthesised using template analysis, a form of codebook thematic analysis. This involved deductively analysing data using relevant a priori themes, which were expanded upon, or modified, via inductive analysis.

RESULTS

The findings highlighted the importance of trust, representation and appreciation of cultural barriers as facilitators to engagement in diet and dementia risk reduction research. Consideration of language barriers, time constraints, social influences and how to embed community outreach activities were reported as driving factors to maximise participation.

CONCLUSIONS

This PPI work will inform the design and co-creation of a culturally adapted dietary intervention for brain health in accordance with the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health and Care Research guidance for developing complex interventions.

The Impact of Advance Care Planning on Healthcare Professionals' Well-being: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Advance care planning (ACP) improves care for patients with chronic illnesses and reduces family stress. However, the impact of ACP interventions on healthcare professionals' well-being remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature evaluating the impact of ACP interventions on healthcare professionals' well-being.

METHODS

We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for systematic reviews and registered the protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42022346354). We included primary studies in all languages that assessed the well-being of healthcare professionals in ACP interventions. We excluded any studies on ACP in psychiatric care and in palliative care that did not address goals of care. Searches were conducted on April 4, 2022, and March 6, 2023 in Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PubMed. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for quality analysis. We present results as a narrative synthesis because of their heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We included 21 articles published in English between 1997 and 2021 with 17 published after 2019. All were conducted in high-income countries, and they involved a total of 1278 participants. Three reported an interprofessional intervention and two included patient partners. Studies had significant methodological flaws but most reported that ACP had a possible positive impact on healthcare professionals' well-being.

CONCLUSION

This review is the first to explore the impact of ACP interventions on healthcare professionals' well-being. ACP interventions appear to have a positive impact, but high-quality studies are scarce. Further research is needed, particularly using more rigorous and systematic methods to implement interventions and report results.

Use of nominal group technique methods in the virtual setting: A reflective account and recommendations for practice

Nominal group technique methods involve the use of structured activities within groups comprised of purposefully selected stakeholders (nominal groups), with the broad aim of achieving a level of consensus and prioritising information. In this paper, we will report how we facilitated nominal groups, using Microsoft Teams, to prioritise content for a theory-based behaviour change intervention to improve responses to clinically deteriorating patients. Our methods incorporated development and piloting of research materials, facilitation of online nominal groups with different stakeholders, and a structured approach to ranking behaviour change strategies. Practical suggestions are offered based on our experience of using this method in a virtual context.

Recommended characteristics and processes for writing lay summaries of healthcare evidence: a co-created scoping review and consultation exercise

BACKGROUND

Lay summaries (LSs) of scientific evidence are critical to sharing research with non-specialist audiences. This scoping review with a consultation exercise aimed to (1) Describe features of the available LS resources; (2) Summarize recommended LS characteristics and content; (3) Outline recommended processes to write a LS; and (4) Obtain stakeholder perspectives on LS characteristics and writing processes.

METHODS

This project was a patient and public partner (PPP)-initiated topic co-led by a PPP and a researcher. The team was supported by three additional PPPs and four researchers. A search of peer-reviewed (Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane libraries, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC and PubMed data bases) and grey literature was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodological Guidance for Scoping Reviews to include any resource that described LS characteristics and writing processes. Two reviewers screened and extracted all resources. Resource descriptions and characteristics were organized by frequency, and processes were inductively analyzed. Nine patient and public partners and researchers participated in three consultation exercise sessions to contextualize the review findings.

RESULTS

Of the identified 80 resources, 99% described characteristics of a LS and 13% described processes for writing a LS. About half (51%) of the resources were published in the last two years. The most recommended characteristics were to avoid jargon (78%) and long or complex sentences (60%). The most frequently suggested LS content to include was study findings (79%). The key steps in writing a LS were doing pre-work, preparing for the target audience, writing, reviewing, finalizing, and disseminating knowledge. Consultation exercise participants prioritized some LS characteristics differently compared to the literature and found many characteristics oversimplistic. Consultation exercise participants generally supported the writing processes found in the literature but suggested some refinements.

CONCLUSIONS

Writing LSs is potentially a growing area, however, efforts are needed to enhance our understanding of important LS characteristics, create resources with and for PPPs, and develop optimal writing processes.

Stakeholder development of an implementation strategy for fall prevention in Norwegian home care - a qualitative co-creation approach

BACKGROUND

The uptake of fall prevention evidence has been slow and limited in home care services. Involving stakeholders in the implementation process is suggested as a method to successfully tailor implementation strategies. The aim of this study was to develop an implementation strategy for fall prevention, targeting healthcare providers working in home care services.

METHODS

This study used an explorative qualitative approach in a five-step co-creation process to involve researchers, service users, and healthcare providers. The first two steps consisted of workshops. This was followed by focus group interviews and individual interviews with key informants as steps three and four. Data from the first four steps were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The fifth and final step was a workshop finalizing a strategy for implementing fall prevention evidence in home health services.

RESULTS

Overall, our findings, resulted in an implementation strategy for fall prevention with four components: (1) Empower leaders to facilitate implementation, operationalized through what managers pay attention to regularly, resource priorities, and time spent on fall prevention, (2) Establish implementation teams, consisting of multidisciplinary healthcare providers from different levels of the organization, with formalized responsibility for implementation, (3) Tailor dual competence improvement, reflecting the need for knowledge and skills for fall prevention and implementation among healthcare providers and users, and (4) Provide implementation support, representing guidance through the implementation process.

CONCLUSIONS

This study advances our understanding of implementation in home care services. Implementation of fall prevention requires an implementation strategy involving a blend of essential components targeting leaders, competent healthcare providers and users, and establishing structures enhancing the implementation process.

Priorities for implementation research on diagnosing cancer in primary care: a consensus process

BACKGROUND

The early detection and diagnosis of cancer to reduce avoidable mortality and morbidity is a challenging task in primary health care. There is a growing evidence base on how to enable earlier cancer diagnosis, but well-recognised gaps and delays exist around the translation of new research findings into routine clinical practice. Implementation research aims to accelerate the uptake of evidence by health care systems and professionals. We aimed to identify priorities for implementation research in early cancer diagnosis in primary care.

METHODS

We used a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi consensus process to identify and rank research priorities. We asked primary care physicians, patients and researchers to complete an online survey suggesting priorities for implementation research in cancer detection and diagnosis. We summarised and presented these suggestions to an 11-member consensus panel comprising nine primary care physicians and two patients. Panellists independently rated the importance of suggestions on a 1-9 scale (9 = very high priority; 1 = very low priority) before and after a structured group discussion. We ranked suggestions using median ratings.

RESULTS

We received a total of 115 suggested priorities for implementation research from 32 survey respondents (including 16 primary care professionals, 11 researchers, and 4 patient and public representatives; 88% of respondents were UK-based). After removing duplicates and ineligible suggestions, we presented 37 suggestions grouped within 17 categories to the consensus panel. Following two rounds of rating, 27 suggestions were highly supported (median rating 7-9). The most highly rated suggestions concerned diagnostic support (e.g., access to imaging) interventions (e.g., professional or patient education), organisation of the delivery of care (e.g., communication within and between teams) and understanding variations in care and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified a set of priorities for implementation research on the early diagnosis of cancer, ranked in importance by primary care physicians and patients. We suggest that researchers and research funders consider these in directing further efforts and resources to improve population outcomes.

[Integrated Care for Patients with Somatic Symptom Disorder in Primary Care - A Qualitative Participatory Evaluation of a Randomised Feasibility Trial]

OBJECTIVE

The VISION intervention is a manualized short-term treatment for people with somatic symptom disorder, integrated into the primary care and delivered by psychotherapists via video consultations. As an innovative technology-based approach, the intervention was most recently piloted in a randomized feasibility trial. During the qualitative accompanying study presented here, the intervention was evaluated and optimised from the user perspective of patients who participated in the feasibility study.

METHODS

We interviewed a total of N=10 patients included in the intervention group in three semi structured focus group discussions focusing on how they (1) assess the intervention in terms of acceptance and individual benefit and (2) which adjustments are necessary from the user perspective for further optimization of the intervention. We performed a qualitative content analysis using MAXQDA Plus 2022.

RESULTS

Respondents reported initial reservations on their part regarding care via video consultation. After a brief period of habituation, the intervention was universally accepted. Main suggestions for improvement included a stronger focus on supporting patients find follow-up psychotherapy (if indicated) more flexible settings (e. g., location of video consultation), and a stronger integration of treatment into primary care.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The study provides systematically elaborated comprehensive findings on participants' practical experiences with the intervention. The model is appropriate for treating people with somatic symptom disorder. Before implementation, important suggestions for improvement should be thoroughly considered with continued patient and public involvement.

Diversity in patient and public involvement in healthcare research and education-Realising the potential

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is an increasing priority in health-related research and education. Attracting and supporting people from different demographic groups to give up their time and get involved is important to help ensure that all parts of society are empowered, represented and their voices heard in decisions that may affect their health and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To determine if a demographically diverse cross-section of society would be interested in contributing to healthcare research and education. (2) To understand factors that can act as barriers and enablers to effective and diverse PPI.

METHOD

PPI survey data was collected via engagement events, with the aim of scoping interest in PPI from a diverse public. A Focus Group study involving members of the public, academic and professional service staff, was then conducted to gain a deeper understanding around the barriers and enablers of diversity within PPI.

RESULTS

71% of a diverse rich public indicated they would like to get involved in healthcare research and teaching. 76% of survey respondents indicated that they would be happy to share a personal or family experience of healthcare. The two biggest factors impacting on our cohort getting involved are' availability of time' and 'being aware of PPI opportunities'. These factors may disproportionally affect specific groups. Shared and individual PPI enablers and barriers were identified across all stakeholder groups within the Focus Group Study, as well as generic and novel factors that would impact on an institutions' ability to improve PPI diversity.

CONCLUSION

These data points confirm a demographically diverse public's appetite to get involved in academic health research and teaching. This needs to be recognised and harnessed to ensure public contributor networks are representative of society. Equality Impact Assessments should be undertaken in relation to all PPI opportunities. There is a need to recognise the investment of time and resources required to build mutually beneficial relationships with diverse communities as well as the development of inclusive 'fit for purpose' PPI infrastructures to support the uptake of diverse PPI contributors.

PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study involved members of the public responding to a short survey. Public contributors made up one of the three focus groups. The School of Medicine lead public contributor was also involved in the preparation of this manuscript.

Recruitment of patients, carers and members of the public to advisory boards, groups and panels in public and patient involved health research: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this scoping review are to: (1) identify the distribution of and context of the recruitment strategies used, (2) explore the facilitators, benefits, barriers and ethical issues of the identified recruitment strategies, (3) distinguish the varying terminology for involvement (ie, panels, boards, individual) and (4) determine if the individual recruitment strategies used were to address issues of representation or bias.

DESIGN

A scoping review.

SETTING

This scoping review follows the framework by Peters et al. Seven electronic databases were explored including Scopus, Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO (conducted July 2021). The search strategy was codeveloped among the research team, PPI research experts and a faculty librarian. Two independent reviewers screened articles by title and abstract and then at full text based on predetermined criteria.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Explore recruitment strategies used, facilitators, benefits, barriers and ethical issues of the identified recruitment strategies. Identify terminology for involvement. Explore recruitment strategies used to address issues of representation or bias.

RESULTS

The final sample was from 51 sources. A large portion of the extracted empirical literature had a clinical focus (37%, n=13) but was not a randomised control trial. The most common recruitment strategies used were human networks (78%, n=40), such as word of mouth, foundation affiliation, existing networks, clinics or personal contacts. Within the reviewed literature, there was a lack of discussion pertaining to facilitators, benefits, barriers and ethical considerations of recruitment strategies was apparent. Finally, 41% (n=21) of studies employed or proposed recruitment strategies or considerations to address issues of representation or bias.

CONCLUSION

We conclude with four key recommendations that researchers can use to better understand appropriate routes to meaningfully involve patients, carers and members of the public to cocreate the evidence informing their care.

The development of the People with Aphasia and Other Layperson Involvement (PAOLI) framework for guiding patient and public involvement (PPI) in aphasia research

BACKGROUND

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in aphasia research requires researchers to include people with aphasia as research partners from the beginning of the study. Yet the quality of reporting on the level and type of involvement is poorly documented in the absence of a framework to guide PPI in aphasia research. This study aimed to extract the items and statements relevant for the development of the People with Aphasia and Other Layperson Involvement (PAOLI) framework for designing and implementing PPI in aphasia research, in collaboration with people with aphasia.

METHOD

The method recommended by the EQUATOR network was followed. This involved: (1) evidence from a scoping review, (2) a thematic analysis of the in-depth interviews, of people with stroke and aphasia, on the topics to be included in the pilot draft, (3) a two round Delphi survey for item/statement selection and (4) an experts' consensus meeting. The research team involved two PPI partners with chronic stroke-induced aphasia. The research process involved co-design and was informed by the Dialogue model.

RESULTS

Twenty-three panellists, from 13 countries, voted in round one with 87% (20/23) responding in round two. The final PAOLI framework includes the following 17 items (with 66 descriptive statements): establish collaborations, recruit patients, gain informed consent, organize induction meetings, train patient partners, create communication links, engage communication partners, conceptualize topics, establish research priorities, reach consensus, work with co-design methods, develop proposals, assist with dissemination of results, promote implementation of the outcomes, support patient partners and promote self-evaluation, monitor progress and assess impact of the patient involvement. These items were considered by the panellists as the most relevant for the involvement of people with aphasia as research partners.

CONCLUSION

The PAOLI is the first international consensus framework for guiding patient involvement in aphasia research. Researchers are encouraged to adopt the framework to improve the quality of their research by promoting the meaningful involvement of people with aphasia within the research team from the start.

Using EMPOWER in daily life: a qualitative investigation of implementation experiences

BACKGROUND

Digital self-management tools blended with clinical triage and peer support have the potential to improve access to early warning signs (EWS) based relapse prevention in schizophrenia care. However, the implementation of digital interventions in psychosis can be poor. Traditionally, research focused on understanding how people implement interventions has focused on the perspectives of mental health staff. Digital interventions are becoming more commonly used by patients within the context of daily life, which means there is a need to understand implementation from the perspectives of patients and carers.

METHODS

Semi-structured one-on-one interviews with 16 patients who had access to the EMPOWER digital self-management intervention during their participation in a feasibility trial, six mental health staff members who supported the patients and were enrolled in the trial, and one carer participant. Interviews focused on understanding implementation, including barriers and facilitators. Data were coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The intervention was well implemented, and EMPOWER was typically perceived positively by patients, mental health staff and the carer we spoke to. However, some patients reported negative views and reported ideas for intervention improvement. Patients reported valuing that the app afforded them access to things like information or increased social contact from peer support workers that went above and beyond that offered in routine care. Patients seemed motivated to continue implementing EMPOWER in daily life when they perceived it was creating positive change to their wellbeing, but seemed less motivated if this did not occur. Mental health staff and carer views suggest they developed increased confidence patients could self-manage and valued using the fact that people they support were using the EMPOWER intervention to open up conversations about self-management and wellbeing.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study suggest peer worker supported digital self-management like EMPOWER has the potential to be implemented. Further evaluations of these interventions are warranted, and conducting qualitative research on the feasibility gives insight into implementation barriers and facilitators, improving the likelihood of interventions being usable. In particular, the views of patients who demonstrated low usage levels would be valuable.

Patient and public involvement is suboptimal in randomized controlled trials addressing a chronic condition

OBJECTIVES

To describe patient and public involvement (PPI) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing a chronic condition and to analyze whether PPI is associated with trial characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We used PubMed search to identify RCTs addressing a chronic condition and published in journals with a mandatory PPI statement.

RESULTS

Across 101 RCTs; 40 (40%) reported PPI at any stage of the research process. PPI contribution occurred mostly at the design stage of RCTs (n = 36), especially for assessing the burden of the intervention (n = 24), and at the conduct stage (n = 21), with the elaboration of communication materials (n = 14). Less than one-third (13/40) of RCTs included PPI in the development or choice of outcome measures. As compared with non-PPI RCTs, PPI RCTs more frequently were published in The BMJ, had a corresponding author from the United Kingdom, reported a public funding source, had a higher inclusion rate, used usual care as a control and evaluated a digital intervention. PPI RCTs were associated with less frequent use of placebo as a control group.

CONCLUSION

Our results underline that PPI is not uncommon in RCTs of chronic conditions but infrequently occurred at a key stage. Yet, the engagement of patients as a real partner in RCTs of chronic conditions should be enhanced.

Data sharing in neurodegenerative disease research: challenges and learnings from the innovative medicines initiative public-private partnership model

Efficient data sharing is hampered by an array of organizational, ethical, behavioral, and technical challenges, slowing research progress and reducing the utility of data generated by clinical research studies on neurodegenerative diseases. There is a particular need to address differences between public and private sector environments for research and data sharing, which have varying standards, expectations, motivations, and interests. The Neuronet data sharing Working Group was set up to understand the existing barriers to data sharing in public-private partnership projects, and to provide guidance to overcome these barriers, by convening data sharing experts from diverse projects in the IMI neurodegeneration portfolio. In this policy and practice review, we outline the challenges and learnings of the WG, providing the neurodegeneration community with examples of good practices and recommendations on how to overcome obstacles to data sharing. These obstacles span organizational issues linked to the unique structure of cross-sectoral, collaborative research initiatives, to technical issues that affect the storage, structure and annotations of individual datasets. We also identify sociotechnical hurdles, such as academic recognition and reward systems that disincentivise data sharing, and legal challenges linked to heightened perceptions of data privacy risk, compounded by a lack of clear guidance on GDPR compliance mechanisms for public-private research. Focusing on real-world, neuroimaging and digital biomarker data, we highlight particular challenges and learnings for data sharing, such as data management planning, development of ethical codes of conduct, and harmonization of protocols and curation processes. Cross-cutting solutions and enablers include the principles of transparency, standardization and co-design - from open, accessible metadata catalogs that enhance findability of data, to measures that increase visibility and trust in data reuse.

Comparison of methods to engage diverse stakeholder populations in prioritizing PrEP implementation strategies for testing in resource-limited settings: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus about how to prioritize potential implementation strategies for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery. We compared several prioritization methods for their agreement and pragmatism in practice in a resource-limited setting.

METHODS

We engaged diverse stakeholders with clinical PrEP delivery and PrEP decision-making experience across 55 facilities in Kenya to prioritize 16 PrEP delivery strategies. We compared four strategy prioritization methods: (1) "past experience surveys" with experienced practitioners reflecting on implementation experience (N = 182); (2 and 3) "pre- and post-small-group ranking" surveys before and after group discussion (N = 44 and 40); (4) "go-zone" quadrant plots of perceived effectiveness vs feasibility. Kendall's correlation analysis was used to compare strategy prioritization using the four methods. Additionally, participants were requested to group strategies into three bundles with up to four strategies/bundle by phone and online survey.

RESULTS

The strategy ranking correlation was strongest between the pre- and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.648; p < 0.001). There was moderate correlation between go-zone plots and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.363; p = 0.079) and between past-experience surveys and post-small-group rankings (Tau: 0.385; p = 0.062). For strategy bundling, participants primarily chose bundles of strategies in the order in which they were listed, reflecting option ordering bias. Neither the phone nor online approach was effective in selecting strategy bundles. Participants agreed that the strategy ranking activities conducted during the workshop were useful in prioritizing a final set of strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Both experienced and inexperienced stakeholder participants' strategy rankings tended to prioritize strategies perceived as feasible. Small group discussions focused on feasibility and effectiveness revealed moderately different priorities than individual rankings. The strategy bundling approach, though less time- and resource-intensive, was not effective. Future research should further compare the relative effectiveness and pragmatism of methodologies to prioritize implementation strategies.

Patient and public involvement in health research in Norway: a survey among researchers and patient organisations

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research may improve both the relevance and quality of the research. There is however a lack of research investigating the experiences, attitudes and barriers towards PPI in clinical research in Norway. The Norwegian Clinical Research Infrastructure Network therefore conducted a survey among researchers and PPI contributors aiming to investigate experiences with PPI and identify current challenges for successful involvement.

METHODS

Two survey questionnaires were developed and distributed in October and November 2021. The survey targeting 1185 researchers was distributed from the research administrative system in the Regional Health Trusts. The survey targeting PPI contributors was distributed through Norwegian patient organisations, regional and national competence centers.

RESULTS

The response rate was 30% among researchers and was unobtainable from PPI contributors due to the survey distribution strategy. PPI was most frequently used in the planning and conduct of the studies, and less utilized in dissemination and implementation of results. Both researchers and user representatives were generally positive to PPI, and agreed that PPI might be more useful in clinical research than in underpinning research. Researchers and PPI contributors who reported that roles and expectations were clarified in advance, were more likely to experience a common understanding of roles and responsibilities in the research project. Both groups pointed to the importance of earmarked funding for PPI activities. There was a demand for a closer collaboration between researchers and patient organisations to develop accessible tools and effective models for PPI in health research.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveys among clinical researchers and PPI contributors indicate overall positive attitudes towards PPI in clinical research. However, more resources, such as budget, time, and accessible tools, are needed. Clarifying roles and expectations, and creating new PPI models under resource constraints can enhance its effectiveness. PPI is underutilized in disseminating and implementing research results, presenting an opportunity for improving healthcare outcomes.

Evaluating the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention to reduce low-value care in adults hospitalized following trauma: a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

While simple Audit & Feedback (A&F) has shown modest effectiveness in reducing low-value care, there is a knowledge gap on the effectiveness of multifaceted interventions to support de-implementation efforts. Given the need to make rapid decisions in a context of multiple diagnostic and therapeutic options, trauma is a high-risk setting for low-value care. Furthermore, trauma systems are a favorable setting for de-implementation interventions as they have quality improvement teams with medical leadership, routinely collected clinical data, and performance-linked to accreditation. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention for reducing low-value clinical practices in acute adult trauma care.

METHODS

We will conduct a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) embedded in a Canadian provincial quality assurance program. Level I-III trauma centers (n = 30) will be randomized (1:1) to receive simple A&F (control) or a multifaceted intervention (intervention). The intervention, developed using extensive background work and UK Medical Research Council guidelines, includes an A&F report, educational meetings, and facilitation visits. The primary outcome will be the use of low-value initial diagnostic imaging, assessed at the patient level using routinely collected trauma registry data. Secondary outcomes will be low-value specialist consultation, low-value repeat imaging after a patient transfer, unintended consequences, determinants for successful implementation, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

DISCUSSION

On completion of the cRCT, if the intervention is effective and cost-effective, the multifaceted intervention will be integrated into trauma systems across Canada. Medium and long-term benefits may include a reduction in adverse events for patients and an increase in resource availability. The proposed intervention targets a problem identified by stakeholders, is based on extensive background work, was developed using a partnership approach, is low-cost, and is linked to accreditation. There will be no attrition, identification, or recruitment bias as the intervention is mandatory in line with trauma center designation requirements, and all outcomes will be assessed with routinely collected data. However, investigators cannot be blinded to group allocation and there is a possibility of contamination bias that will be minimized by conducting intervention refinement only with participants in the intervention arm.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (February 24, 2023, # NCT05744154 ).

The ethical matrix as a method for involving people living with disease and the wider public (PPI) in near-term artificial intelligence research

INTRODUCTION

The rapid pace of research in the field of Artificial Intelligence in medicine has associated risks for near-term AI. Ethical considerations of the use of AI in medicine remain a subject of much debate. Concurrently, the Involvement of People living with disease and the Public (PPI) in research is becoming mandatory in the EU and UK. The goal of this research was to elucidate the important values for our relevant stakeholders: People with MS, Radiologists, neurologists, Registered Healthcare Practitioners and Computer Scientists concerning AI in radiology and synthesize these in an ethical matrix.

METHODS

An ethical matrix workshop co-designed with a patient expert. The workshop yielded a survey which was disseminated to the professional societies of the relevant stakeholders. Quantitative data were analysed using the Pingouin 0.53 python package. Qualitative data were examined with word frequency analysis and analysed for themes with grounded theory with a patient expert.

RESULTS

184 participants were recruited, (54, 60, 17, 12, 41 respectively). There were significant (p < 0.00001) differences in age, gender and ethnicity between groups. Key themes emerging from our results were the importance fast and accurate results, explanations over model performance and the significance of maintaining personal connections and choice. These themes were used to construct the ethical matrix.

CONCLUSION

The ethical matrix is a useful tool for PPI and stakeholder engagement with particular advantages for near-term AI in the pandemic era.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

We have produced an ethical matrix that allows for the inclusion of stakeholder opinion in medical AI research design.

Informing Simulation Design: A Qualitative Phenomenological Study of the Experiences of Bereaved Parents and Actors

INTRODUCTION

Simulations, which represent reality, are effective in pediatric healthcare communication skills education and training. Parents are increasingly engaged in simulation development, particularly for authentic character development, to help achieve greater psychological fidelity. For simulated encounters related to a child's end-of-life, involvement of bereaved parents would make sense. However, this is challenging because there is limited research to guide their inclusion and significant responsibility for any approach to be thoughtful and psychologically safe for participating parents. This study explores the impact and experiences of bereaved parents and actors who participated in simulation design.

METHODS

This qualitative phenomenological study involved five bereaved parents and two actors who participated in a full-day workshop to design and develop characters for use in a simulation. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted up to four weeks after the workshop. Data collected from these telephone interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Bereaved parents found the workshop emotionally challenging but positive, worthwhile, and beneficial. Similarly, actors found the workshop helpful in character development and, although it was an intense experience for them, it validated the importance of their work. Key elements of our research findings could inform future such activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Involving bereaved parents in simulation design can be psychologically safe and beneficial for both parents and actors. Ongoing involvement of bereaved parents may lead to higher-quality simulated experiences, allowing clinicians to practice skills to enhance care provided at a child's end-of-life.

Digital technology and patient and public involvement (PPI) in routine care and clinical research-A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) has growing impact on the design of clinical care and research studies. There remains underreporting of formal PPI events including views related to using digital tools. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of hosting a hybrid PPI event to gather views on the use of digital tools in clinical care and research.

METHODS

A PPI focus day was held following local procedures and published recommendations related to advertisement, communication and delivery. Two exemplar projects were used as the basis for discussions and qualitative and quantitative data was collected.

RESULTS

32 individuals expressed interest in the PPI day and 9 were selected to attend. 3 participated in person and 6 via an online video-calling platform. Selected written and verbal feedback was collected on two digitally themed projects and on the event itself. The overall quality and interactivity for the event was rated as 4/5 for those who attended in person and 4.5/5 and 4.8/5 respectively, for those who attended remotely.

CONCLUSIONS

A hybrid PPI event is feasible and offers a flexible format to capture the views of patients. The overall enthusiasm for digital tools amongst patients in routine care and clinical research is high, though further work and standardised, systematic reporting of PPI events is required.

Theoretical and methodological approaches in designing, developing, and delivering interventions for oral health behaviour change

Oral health behaviour change interventions are gaining momentum on a global scale. After lagging behind other disciplines, oral health behaviour change is becoming an area of fast and important development. Theories used in medicine and healthcare more generally are now being applied to oral health behaviour change with varying results. Despite the importance of using theories when designing and developing interventions, the variety and variation of theories available to choose from create a series of dilemmas and potential hazards. Some theories, like the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) model, and frameworks, like the Behaviour Change Wheel might represent areas of opportunity for oral health behaviour change interventions with careful consideration vital. Different methodological approaches to intervention development are actively utilized in oral health with a wide host of potential opportunities. The issue of co-designing and co-developing interventions with intended users and stakeholders from the start is an important component for successful and effective interventions, one that oral health behaviour change interventions need to consistently implement. Oral health behaviour change interventions are utilizing technology-based approaches as a major vehicle for intervention delivery and, innovative solutions are implemented across a wide host of oral health behaviour change interventions. With multiple options for designing, developing, and delivering interventions, careful selection of appropriate, user-inclusive, and adaptable approaches is essential. With a lot of available information and evidence from other disciplines, oral health behaviour change interventions need to reflect on lessons learned in other fields whilst also maximizing the potential of the wide variety of theories, frameworks, methodologies, and techniques available at present.

Understanding tailoring to support the implementation of evidence-based interventions in healthcare: The CUSTOMISE research programme protocol

Although there are effective evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to prevent, treat and coordinate care for chronic conditions they may not be adopted widely and when adopted, implementation challenges can limit their impact.  Implementation strategies are "methods or techniques used to enhance the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of a clinical program or practice". There is some evidence to suggest that to be more effective,  strategies should be tailored; that is, selected and designed to address specific determinants which may influence implementation in a given context. Despite the growing popularity of tailoring the concept is ill-defined, and the way in which tailoring is applied can vary across studies or lack detail when reported. There has been less focus on the part of tailoring where stakeholders prioritise determinants and select strategies, and the way in which theory, evidence and stakeholders' perspectives should be combined to make decisions during the process. Typically, tailoring is evaluated based on the effectiveness of the tailored strategy, we do not have a clear sense of the mechanisms through which tailoring works, or how to measure the "success" of the tailoring process. We lack an understanding of how stakeholders can be involved effectively in tailoring and the influence of different approaches on the outcome of tailoring. Our research programme, CUSTOMISE (Comparing and Understanding Tailoring Methods for Implementation Strategies in healthcare) will address some of these outstanding questions and generate evidence on  the feasibility, acceptability, and efficiency of different tailoring approaches, and build capacity in implementation science in Ireland, developing and delivering training and supports for, and network of, researchers and implementation practitioners. The evidence generated across the studies conducted as part of CUSTOMISE will bring greater clarity, consistency, coherence, and transparency to tailoring, a key process in implementation science.

Meaningful Engagement of Persons Affected by Leprosy in Research: An Exploration of Its Interpretation, Barriers, and Opportunities

Despite the growing interest in public and patient involvement in research, best practices in the leprosy context have yet to be explored. This mixed-method study aimed to explore the interpretation, barriers and opportunities of meaningful engagement of persons affected by leprosy in research through: (i) an exploratory phase consisting of key informant interviews with experts in public and patient involvement (n = 2) and experts-by-experience (i.e., persons affected by leprosy; n = 4), and (ii) an in-depth phase among leprosy researchers consisting of an online survey (n = 21) and key informant interviews (n = 7). Qualitative data were thematically analyzed. Basic descriptive statistics were used to summarize the survey data. Key informant interviewees unanimously agreed to the importance of engagement in research. Survey results indicated that the level of engagement differed across research stages. Identified barriers included a lack of skills for or awareness of engagement among both experts-by-experience and researchers, stigma and limited time and resources. Opportunities included capacity strengthening, creating a shared understanding, building rapport, and establishing a safe environment. In conclusion, this exploratory study emphasized the importance of engagement of experts-by-experience in leprosy research and identified ways forward that include, but are not limited to, the acknowledgement of its value and creating a shared understanding.

Development of a video-based evidence synthesis knowledge translation resource: Drawing on a user-centred design approach

Objectives

We aimed to develop a video animation knowledge translation (KT) resource to explain the purpose, use and importance of evidence synthesis to the public regarding healthcare decision-making.

Methods

We drew on a user-centred design approach to develop a spoken animated video (SAV) by conducting two cycles of idea generation, prototyping, user testing, analysis, and refinement. Six researchers identified the initial key messages of the SAV and informed the first draft of the storyboard and script. Seven members of the public provided input on this draft and the key messages through think-aloud interviews, which we used to develop an SAV prototype. Seven additional members of the public participated in think-aloud interviews while watching the video prototype. All members of the public also completed a questionnaire on perceived usefulness, desirability, clarity and credibility. We subsequently synthesised all data to develop the final SAV.

Results

Researchers identified the initial key messages as 1) the importance of evidence synthesis, 2) what an evidence synthesis is and 3) how evidence synthesis can impact healthcare decision-making. Members of the public rated the initial video prototype as 9/10 for usefulness, 8/10 for desirability, 8/10 for clarity and 9/10 for credibility. Using their guidance and feedback, we produced a three-and-a-half-minute video animation. The video was uploaded on YouTube, has since been translated into two languages, and viewed over 12,000 times to date.

Conclusions

Drawing on user-centred design methods provided a structured and transparent approach to the development of our SAV. Involving members of the public enhanced the credibility and usefulness of the resource. Future work could explore involving the public from the outset to identify key messages in developing KT resources explaining methodological topics. This study describes the systematic development of a KT resource with limited resources and provides transferrable learnings for others wishing to do similar.

Engagement of patient and family advisors in health system redesign in Canada

OBJECTIVES

Globally, there has been a shift towards integrated care delivery and patient-centredness in the design of health services. Such a transformation is underway in Ontario, which is progressively using an interprofessional team-based approach known as Ontario Health Teams (OHTs) to deliver care. During their initial development, OHTs were required to integrate patient and families' preferences, experiences and opinions in the form of consultation and partnership with patient and family advisors (PFAs). This study aimed to understand how PFAs were involved in the early stages of planning for health system change and the perceived benefits of including PFAs in system reform.

METHODS

This study used a qualitative descriptive design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 126 participants at 12 OHTs, including PFA (n = 16) and non-PFA (n = 110) members (e.g. clinicians). Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

We identified four themes; mechanisms of engagement, motivations to engage, challenges to PFA engagement and PFAs' impact and added value. Overall, participants viewed PFA engagement positively and PFAs felt valued and empowered. There remain logistical challenges around PFA compensation, and the amount of time and training expected of PFAs. However, all participants believed that developing an understanding of the patient, caregiver and family experience will strengthen the engagement of PFAs in OHT planning, decisions and policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse approaches to and stages of PFA engagement fostered meaningful and highly valued contributions to OHT development. These were considered critical to successfully achieving the mandate of patient-centred care reform.

Too much theory and not enough practice? The challenge of implementation science application in healthcare practice

BACKGROUND

Implementation science (IS) should contribute to maintaining high standards of care across healthcare systems and enhancing care practices. However, despite the evident need for greater and more rapid uptake and integration of evidence in practice, IS design and methodology fall short of the needs of effective translation.

AIM

In this paper we examine what it is about IS that makes it so appealing for effective uptake of interventions in routine practice, and yet so difficult to achieve. We propose a number of ways that implementation scientists could build mutual relationships with healthcare practitioners and other stakeholders including public members to ensure greater shared care practices, and highlight the value of IS training, collaborative educational events, and co-designed research.

DISCUSSION

More consideration should be given to IS applications in healthcare contexts. Implementation scientists can make a valuable contribution by mobilizing theory and improving practice. However, goals for an evidence-based system may be more appropriately achieved through greater outreach and collaboration, with methods that are flexible to support rapid implementation in complex adaptive systems. Collective learning and mutual trust can be cultivated by embedding researchers into healthcare services while offering greater opportunities for practitioners to learn about, and engage in, implementation research.

CONCLUSION

To bridge the worlds of healthcare practice and IS, researchers could be more consistent in the relationships they build with professionals and the public, communicating through a shared language and co-joining practical approaches to effective implementation. This will build capacity for improved collaboration and foster respectful, interdisciplinary relationships.

Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is twofold: first, to describe the methods used when involving children and young people (CYP) in developing a paediatric research agenda and, second, to evaluate how the existing literature describes the impact of involving CYP. We distinguish three forms of impact: impact on the research agenda (focused impact), impact on researchers and CYP (diffuse impact) and impact on future research (research impact).

DESIGN

A narrative review of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar was conducted from October 2016 to January 2022. The included studies involved at least one CYP in developing a research agenda and were published in English.

RESULTS

22 studies were included; the CYP involved were aged between 6 years and 25 years. Little variation was found in the methods used to involve them. The methods used were James Lind Alliance (JLA) approach (n=16), focus groups (n=2), workshop (n=2), research prioritisation by affected communities (n=1) and combined methods (n=1). Impact was rarely described: focused impact in nine studies, diffuse impact in zero studies and research impact in three studies.

CONCLUSION

This study concludes that the JLA approach is most frequently used to involve CYP and that all methods used to involve them are rarely evaluated. It also concludes that the reported impact of involving CYPs is incomplete. This study implies that to convince sceptical researchers of the benefits of involving CYPs and to justify the costs, more attention should be paid to reporting these impacts.

Assessments zur Erhebung des Fitnesszustandes in Therapiegruppen für Personen mit axialer Spondyloarthritis – eine Machbarkeitsstudie

Hintergrund Die Schweizerische Vereinigung Morbus Bechterew hat die Empfehlungen für körperliche Aktivität der europäischen Rheumaliga in einem Gruppentherapie-Konzept für Personen mit axialer Spondyloarthritis (axSpA) umgesetzt. Dieses Konzept beinhaltet neben der Anleitung zum Training in allen 4 Fitnessdimensionen (Ausdauer, Kraft, Beweglichkeit, Neuromotorik) auch Bewegungsberatung und regelmäßige Fitness-Assessments für die Planung und Dokumentation des individuellen Therapiefortschritts sowie für die Qualitätsevaluation der Therapiegruppen.

Ziel Evaluation der Durchführbarkeit der Fitness-Assessments, indem Physiotherapeut*innen (PT) und Gruppenteilnehmende mit axSpA (TNaxSpA) Akzeptanz, Praktikabilität und Integration beurteilen.

Methode Machbarkeitsstudie in 4 Pilottherapiegruppen. PT führten die Assessmentbatterie, bestehend aus a) Chester Step Test (CST) für die aerobe Fitness, b) modifizierter Rumpfkrafttest für die Rumpfkraft, c) Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) für die Beweglichkeit der Wirbelsäule und d) Single Leg Stance Test (SLST) für das Gleichgewicht, mit den TNaxSpA durch. Anschließend bewerteten die PT und TNaxSpA mittels Fragebögen die Akzeptanz, Durchführbarkeit und Integration. Die Durchführbarkeit der Bewertungen wurde anhand von 3 Stufen (I–III) definiert: Bei einer positiven Bewertung von > 80 % (Stufe I) wurde eine bestimmte Bewertung als geeignet angesehen, bei einer positiven Bewertung von 50–80 % (Stufe II) waren Anpassungen erforderlich, bei einer positiven Bewertung von < 50 % (Stufe III) wurde eine bestimmte Bewertung als nicht geeignet für die Gruppenübungstherapie angesehen und es musste eine neue Auswahl getroffen werden.

Ergebnisse Der BASMI wurde von TNaxSpA und PT mit Stufe I bewertet, es waren keine Anpassungen erforderlich. Der CST, SLST und modifizierte Rumpfkrafttest wurden von TNaxSpA mit Stufe I und von PT mit Stufe II bewertet, notwendige Anpassungen wurden entsprechend definiert.

Schlussfolgerung Aus Sicht der Patient*innen wurde die Durchführbarkeit der Tests in Bezug auf Akzeptanz, Durchführbarkeit und Integration positiv bewertet. Aus Sicht der PT waren einige Personen mit axSpA einsetzbar. Auf diese Weise kann der individuelle Fitnesszustand evaluiert und die Interventionen angepasst werden, sodass die Qualität der Gruppenübungstherapie kontinuierlich evaluiert und gegebenenfalls verbessert werden kann.

Cross-cultural adaptation, validity and rehability of the QUIPA tool: Turkish version

The Quality Indicators for Physiotherapy Management of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis (QUIPA) is the only patient-reported outcome measure to assess the quality indicators of physiotherapy management of hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA). It consists of 3 subscales and a total of 18 questions. The purpose of this research was to translate and adapt the QUIPA into the Turkish language using a cross-cultural approach as well as test its validity and reliability for Turkish-speaking patients with hip/knee OA. Ninety-two patients with hip/knee OA were enrolled in the research. The cross-cultural adaptation of the QUIPA was performed according to guidelines defined by Beaton et al. Participants completed the QUIPA tool twice at an interval of 7 days. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were determined by interpreting the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, respectively. Construct validity was tested via exploratory factor analysis. For the first, second, and third subscales and total score of QUIPA, ICC was found to be 0.895, 0.947, 0.665, and 0.925, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.682, 0.797, 0.593, and 0.812. The Exploratory Factor Analysis demonstrated that the QUIPA tool is based on 3 factors. These results indicate that the Turkish version of the QUIPA has excellent test-retest reliability and good internal consistency. Therefore, the Turkish version of the QUIPA seems to be a valid and reliable tool to assess the quality indicators of physiotherapy management of hip/knee OA in Turkish-speaking patients. It is intended to be used in clinical settings and research works.

A Systematic Review of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Bariatric Research Trials: The Need for More Work

Patient and public involvement (PPI) has gained increased attention in research circles. The consistency of PPI reporting has been addressed by the development of validated checklists such as GRIPP and GRIPP2. The primary aim of this study was to identify the incidence of PPI reporting in bariatric research. MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL/Cochrane databases were searched for publications between 1st January 2018 to 31st December 2021 for "bariatric surgery" OR "weight loss surgery" OR "obesity surgery" AND "randomized controlled trials." Ninety studies fulfilled exclusion criteria; two studies reported direct PPI involvement, one indirectly used PPI and one reported not using PPI methods. No other study made direct or indirect mention of PPI. Concluding, that GRIPP2 and PPI reporting in bariatric surgery trials is lacking.

Evaluating a Global Assessment Measure Created by Standardized Patients for the Multiple Mini Interview in Medical School Admissions: Mixed Methods Study

Background

Standardized patients (SPs) are essential stakeholders in the multiple mini interviews (MMIs) that are increasingly used to assess medical school applicants’ interpersonal skills. However, there is little evidence for their inclusion in the development of instruments.

Objective

This study aimed to describe the process and evaluate the impact of having SPs co-design and cocreate a global measurement question that assesses medical school applicants’ readiness for medical school and acceptance status.

Methods

This study used an exploratory, sequential, and mixed methods study design. First, we evaluated the initial MMI program and determined the next quality improvement steps. Second, we held a collaborative workshop with SPs to codevelop the assessment question and response options. Third, we evaluated the created question and the additional MMI rubric items through statistical tests based on 1084 applicants’ data from 3 cohorts of applicants starting in the 2018-2019 academic year. The internal reliability of the MMI was measured using a Cronbach α test, and its prediction of admission status was tested using a forward stepwise binary logistic regression.

Results

Program evaluation indicated the need for an additional quantitative question to assess applicant readiness for medical school. In total, 3 simulation specialists, 2 researchers, and 21 SPs participated in a workshop leading to a final global assessment question and responses. The Cronbach α’s were >0.8 overall and in each cohort year. The final stepwise logistic model for all cohorts combined was statistically significant (P<.001), explained 9.2% (R²) of the variance in acceptance status, and correctly classified 65.5% (637/972) of cases. The final model consisted of 3 variables: empathy, rank of readiness, and opening the encounter.

Conclusions

The collaborative nature of this project between stakeholders, including nonacademics and researchers, was vital for the success of this project. The SP-created question had a significant impact on the final model predicting acceptance to medical school. This finding indicates that SPs bring a critical perspective that can improve the process of evaluating medical school applicants.

Engaging with patients in research on knowledge translation/implementation science methods: a self study

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the British Columbia (Canada) SUPPORT (SUpport for People and Patient-Oriented Research) Unit created six methods clusters to advance methodologies in patient and public oriented research (POR). The knowledge translation (KT)/implementation science methods cluster identified that although there was guidance about how to involve patients and public members in POR research generally, little was known about how best to involve patients and public members on teams specifically exploring POR KT/implementation science methodologies. The purpose of this self-study was to explore what it means to engage patients and the public in studies of POR methods through the reflections of members of five KT/implementation science teams.

METHODS

Informed by a collaborative action research approach, this quality improvement self-study focused on reflection within four KT/implementation science research teams in 2020-2021. The self-study included two rounds of individual interviews with 18 members across four teams. Qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach followed by a structured discussion of preliminary findings with the research teams. Subsequently, through two small group discussion sessions, the patients/public members from the teams refined the findings.

RESULTS

Undertaking research on POR KT/implementation science methodologies typically requires teams to work with the uncertainty of exploratory and processual research approaches, make good matches between patients/public members and the team, work intentionally yet flexibly, and be attuned to the external context and its influences on the team. POR methodological research teams need to consider that patients/public members bring their life experiences and world views to the research project. They become researchers in their own right. Individual and team reflection allows teams to become aware of team needs, acknowledge team members' vulnerabilities, gain greater sensitivity, and enhance communication.

CONCLUSIONS

The iterative self-study process provided research team members with opportunities for reflection and new understanding. Working with patients/public team members as co-researchers opens up new ways of understanding important aspects of research methodologies, which may influence future KT/implementation science research approaches.

Keeping patient and public partnership at the heart of medical technology development during Covid-19: examples of adaptive practice

NIHR (National Institute for Health Research) Devices for Dignity MedTech Cooperative (D4D) and NIHR Children and Young People MedTech Cooperative (CYPMedTech) have established track records in keeping patient and public involvement (PPI) at the core of medical technology development, evaluation and implementation. The 2020 global COVID-19 pandemic presented significant challenges to maintaining this crucial focus. In this paper we describe prior successful methodologies and share examples of the adaptations made in order to continue to engage with patients and the public throughout the pandemic and beyond. We reflect on learning gained from these experiences, and new areas of scope and focus relating to broadening the reach of engagement and representation, along with associated resource requirements and impact metrics.

At-distance neurocognitive rehabilitation during COVID-19 pandemic: A first glance of patients' perspectives about the process and an online platform

Despite the use of digital communication technologies in neurocognitive rehabilitation has been widely used in face-to-face interventions, the difficulties of using ICT-based tools to provide rehabilitation services and the unfamiliarity of the neuropsychologists with internet interventions limited the use of these kinds of interventions in their clinical practices. The lockdown and mitigating measures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, on the other hand, forced the use of at-distance and online interventions as a means to mitigate the impact of those measures on the mental health and rehabilitation processes of people with neurological disorders. Overall, little is known about the perspectives of patients with acquired neurological conditions about rehabilitation services delivered at distance. Therefore, the main goal of this study was to explore the perceptions that patients with neurological disorders have on at-distance online neurocognitive rehabilitation, namely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sixteen patients with acquired neurological conditions attending an online neurocognitive rehabilitation program in a Portuguese rehabilitation center filled in an online questionnaire during the mandatory lockdown. The results of this study highlight the potential of delivering rehabilitation services at distance, presenting its advantages and limitations from patients' perspectives, as well as suggestions for improving both neurorehabilitation processes and the online rehabilitation platform used.

Digital smartphone intervention to recognise and manage early warning signs in schizophrenia to prevent relapse: the EMPOWER feasibility cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

Relapse is a major determinant of outcome for people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Early warning signs frequently precede relapse. A recent Cochrane Review found low-quality evidence to suggest a positive effect of early warning signs interventions on hospitalisation and relapse.

OBJECTIVE

How feasible is a study to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a digital intervention to recognise and promptly manage early warning signs of relapse in schizophrenia with the aim of preventing relapse?

DESIGN

A multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial involving eight community mental health services, with 12-month follow-up.

SETTINGS

Glasgow, UK, and Melbourne, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Service users were aged > 16 years and had a schizophrenia spectrum disorder with evidence of a relapse within the previous 2 years. Carers were eligible for inclusion if they were nominated by an eligible service user.

INTERVENTIONS

The Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Wellbeing, Engagement, and Recovery (EMPOWER) intervention was designed to enable participants to monitor changes in their well-being daily using a mobile phone, blended with peer support. Clinical triage of changes in well-being that were suggestive of early signs of relapse was enabled through an algorithm that triggered a check-in prompt that informed a relapse prevention pathway, if warranted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcomes were feasibility of the trial and feasibility, acceptability and usability of the intervention, as well as safety and performance. Candidate co-primary outcomes were relapse and fear of relapse.

RESULTS

We recruited 86 service users, of whom 73 were randomised (42 to EMPOWER and 31 to treatment as usual). Primary outcome data were collected for 84% of participants at 12 months. Feasibility data for people using the smartphone application (app) suggested that the app was easy to use and had a positive impact on motivations and intentions in relation to mental health. Actual app usage was high, with 91% of users who completed the baseline period meeting our a priori criterion of acceptable engagement (> 33%). The median time to discontinuation of > 33% app usage was 32 weeks (95% confidence interval 14 weeks to ∞). There were 8 out of 33 (24%) relapses in the EMPOWER arm and 13 out of 28 (46%) in the treatment-as-usual arm. Fewer participants in the EMPOWER arm had a relapse (relative risk 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.98), and time to first relapse (hazard ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.74) was longer in the EMPOWER arm than in the treatment-as-usual group. At 12 months, EMPOWER participants were less fearful of having a relapse than those in the treatment-as-usual arm (mean difference -4.29, 95% confidence interval -7.29 to -1.28). EMPOWER was more costly and more effective, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3041. This incremental cost-effectiveness ratio would be considered cost-effective when using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

LIMITATIONS

This was a feasibility study and the outcomes detected cannot be taken as evidence of efficacy or effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

A trial of digital technology to monitor early warning signs that blended with peer support and clinical triage to detect and prevent relapse is feasible.

FUTURE WORK

A main trial with a sample size of 500 (assuming 90% power and 20% dropout) would detect a clinically meaningful reduction in relapse (relative risk 0.7) and improvement in other variables (effect sizes 0.3-0.4).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN99559262.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 27. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding in Australia was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1095879).

Patient reported outcomes in oncology: changing perspectives-a systematic review

In public health context, oncology is associated with severe negative impact on patients and on their relatives’ quality of life. Over the last decades, survival has remained at 50% worldwide for some tumor locations. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) assessment and, the corresponding use in clinical practice, help establishing patient individualized profiling involving caregivers. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine critical success factors for PROs assessment in daily clinical oncology practice. Additionally, we investigated how PROs collection can change oncology perspectives for patients and caregivers. According to PRISMA guidelines, 83 studies were included in this systematic review, whether related with implementation in daily clinical practice or associated with its use in oncology. PROs assessment gathers multi-professional teams, biomedical and clinical expertise, patients, families and caregivers. Institutional involvement, first line for caregiver’s adherence, team continuous formation, encompassing training and support, design of clear workflows, continuous monitoring, and data analysis are crucial for implementation. PROs measures are decisive in oncology. Several items were improved, including caregiver–patient–physician communication, patient risk groups identification, unmet problems and needs detection, disease course and treatment tracking, prognostic markers, cost-effectiveness measurement and comfort/support provision for both patients and caregivers. Routine assessment and implementation of PROs in clinical practice are a major challenge and a paradigm transformation for future.

Enhancing patient and public contribution in health outcome selection during clinical guideline development: an ethnographic study

Background

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a cornerstone in enhancing healthcare research and delivery, including clinical guideline development. Health outcomes concern changes in the health status of an individual or population that are attributable to an intervention. Discussion of relevant health outcomes impacts the resulting clinical guidelines for practice. This study explores how the input of PPI contributors at the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is integrated into guideline development, particularly in relation to health outcome selection.

Methods

The study used an ethnographic methodological approach. Data comprised: observations of committee meetings, scoping workshops and training sessions, and in-depth interviews with PPI contributors, health professionals and chairs from clinical guideline development committees. Data were analysed thematically.

Results

PPI contributors’ input in the guideline development process was often of limited scope, particularly in selecting health outcomes. Key constraints on their input included: the technical content and language of guidelines, assumed differences in the health-related priorities between PPI contributors and health professionals, and the linear timeline of the guideline development process. However, PPI contributors can influence clinical guideline development including the selection of relevant health outcomes. This was achieved through several factors and highlights the important role of the committee chair, the importance of training and support for all committee members, the use of plain language and the opportunity for all committee members to engage.

Conclusions

Lay member input during the outcome selection phase of clinical guideline development is achievable, but there are challenges to overcome. Study findings identify ways that future guideline developers can support meaningful lay involvement in guideline development and health outcome selection.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07736-6.

Enhanced feedback interventions to promote evidence-based blood transfusion guidance and reduce unnecessary use of blood components: the AFFINITIE research programme including two cluster factorial RCTs

Background

Blood transfusion is a common but costly treatment. Repeated national audits in the UK suggest that up to one-fifth of transfusions are unnecessary when judged against recommendations for good clinical practice. Audit and feedback seeks to improve patient care and outcomes by comparing clinical care against explicit standards. It is widely used internationally in quality improvement. Audit and feedback generally has modest but variable effects on patient care. A considerable scope exists to improve the impact that audit and feedback has, particularly through head-to-head trials comparing different ways of delivering feedback.

Objectives

The AFFINITIE (Development & Evaluation of Audit and Feedback INterventions to Increase evidence-based Transfusion practIcE) programme aimed to design and evaluate enhanced feedback interventions, within a national blood transfusion audit programme, to promote evidence-based guidance and reduce the unnecessary use of blood components. We developed, piloted and refined two feedback interventions, ‘enhanced content’ and ‘enhanced follow-on’ (workstream 1), evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the two feedback interventions compared with standard feedback practice (workstream 2), examined intervention fidelity and contextual influences (workstream 3) and developed general implementation recommendations and tools for other audit and feedback programmes (workstream 4).

Design

Interviews, observations and documentary analysis in four purposively sampled hospitals explored contemporary practice and opportunities for strengthening feedback. We developed two interventions: ‘enhanced content’, to improve the clarity and utility of feedback reports, and ‘enhanced follow-on’, to help hospital staff with action-planning (workstream 1). We conducted two linked 2 × 2 factorial cross-sectional cluster-randomised trials within transfusion audits for major surgery and haematological oncology, respectively (workstream 2). We randomised hospital clusters (the organisational level at which hospital transfusion teams operate) to enhanced or standard content or enhanced or standard follow-on. Outcome assessment was masked to assignment. Decision-analytic modelling evaluated the costs, benefits and cost-effectiveness of the feedback interventions in both trials from the perspective of the NHS. A parallel process evaluation used semistructured interviews, documentary analyses and web analytics to assess the fidelity of delivery, receipt and enactment and to identify contextual influences (workstream 3). We explored ways of improving the impact of national audits with their representatives (workstream 4).

Setting and participants

All NHS hospital trusts and health boards participating in the National Comparative Audit of Blood Transfusions were invited to take part. Among 189 hospital trusts and health boards screened, 152 hospital clusters participated in the surgical audit. Among 187 hospital trusts and health boards screened, 141 hospital clusters participated in the haematology audit.

Interventions

‘Enhanced content’ aimed to ensure that the content and format of feedback reports were consistent with behaviour change theory and evidence. ‘Enhanced follow-on’ comprised a web-based toolkit and telephone support to facilitate local dissemination, planning and response to feedback.

Main outcome measures

Proportions of acceptable transfusions, based on existing evidence and guidance and algorithmically derived from national audit data.

Data sources

Trial primary outcomes were derived from manually collected, patient-level audit data. Secondary outcomes included routinely collected data for blood transfusion.

Results

With regard to the transfusions in the major surgery audit, 135 (89%) hospital clusters participated from 152 invited. We randomised 69 and 66 clusters to enhanced and standard content, respectively, and 68 and 67 clusters to enhanced and standard follow-on, respectively. We analysed a total of 2222 patient outcomes at 12 months in 54 and 58 (enhanced and standard content, respectively) and 54 and 58 (enhanced and standard follow-on, respectively) hospital clusters. With regard to the haematology audit, 134 hospital clusters (95%) participated from 141 invited. We randomised 66 and 68 clusters to enhanced and standard content, respectively, and 67 clusters to both enhanced and standard follow-on. We analysed a total of 3859 patient outcomes at 12 months in 61 and 61 (enhanced and standard content, respectively) and 63 and 59 (enhanced and standard follow-on) hospital clusters. We found no effect of either of the enhanced feedback interventions in either trial across all outcomes. Incremental enhanced intervention costs ranged from £18 to £248 per site. The enhanced feedback interventions were dominated by the standard intervention in cost-effectiveness analyses. The interventions were delivered as designed and intended, but subsequent local engagement was low. Although the enhancements were generally acceptable, doubts about the credibility of the blood transfusion audits undermined the case for change.

Limitations

Limitations included the number of participating clusters; loss to follow-up of trial clusters, reducing statistical power and validity; incomplete audit and cost data contributing to outcome measures; participant self-selection; reporting; missing data related to additional staff activity generated in response to receiving feedback; and recall biases in the process evaluation interviews.

Conclusions

The enhanced feedback interventions were acceptable to recipients but were more costly and no more effective than standard feedback in reducing unnecessary use of blood components, and, therefore, should not be recommended on economic grounds.

Future work

We have demonstrated the feasibility of embedding ambitious large-scale rigorous research within national audit programmes. Further head-to-head comparisons of different feedback interventions are needed in these programmes to identify cost-effective ways of increasing the impact of the interventions.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15490813.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Towards codesign in respiratory care: development of an implementation-ready intervention to improve guideline-adherent adult asthma care across primary and secondary care settings (The SENTINEL Project)

Short-acting beta agonist (SABA) overuse (≥3 canisters annually) is associated with worse asthma outcomes and accounts for the majority of greenhouse gas emissions from asthma inhalers in England. Reducing SABA overuse aligns with the National Health Service long-term plan to optimise asthma treatment while minimising environmental impact, but adoption of local asthma guidelines for a SABA-free maintenance and reliever therapy strategy for step 3 asthma patients is limited. In this Perspective, we describe patient and staff involvement in a codesign process adapted from experience-based codesign (EBCD) principles to develop an implementation-ready intervention within a practice-relevant timescale.

The codesigned intervention consists of five pillars: healthcare professional education; implementation of ‘gold standard’ prescribing practices; targeted asthma reviews; patient education and support; and real-time data monitoring and reporting of asthma care metrics. The codesign process contributed to all pillars and, by identifying potential individual and organisational barriers to implementation, enabled the development of plans to address these barriers.

In this Perspective, we reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of our codesign process, outline how EBCD principles can be used in respiratory research and propose actions for patients, health professionals, researchers and funders to develop the potential of EBCD in respiratory research.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination on Symptoms from Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19: Results from the Nationwide VAXILONG Study

Introduction: Few data are available concerning the effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on the persistent symptoms associated with COVID-19, also called long-COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Patients and methods: We conducted a nationwide online study among adult patients with PASC as defined by symptoms persisting over 4 weeks following a confirmed or probable COVID-19, without any identified alternative diagnosis. Information concerning PASC symptoms, vaccine type and scheme and its effect on PASC symptoms were studied. Results: 620 questionnaires were completed and 567 satisfied the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. The respondents’ median age was 44 (IQR 25–75: 37–50) and 83.4% were women. The initial infection was proven in 365 patients (64%) and 5.1% had been hospitalized to receive oxygen. A total of 396 patients had received at least one injection of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at the time of the survey, after a median of 357 (198–431) days following the initially-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among the 380 patients who reported persistent symptoms at the time of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, 201 (52.8%) reported a global effect on symptoms following the injection, corresponding to an improvement in 21.8% and a worsening in 31%. There were no differences based on the type of vaccine used. After a complete vaccination scheme, 93.3% (28/30) of initially seronegative patients reported a positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG. A total of 170 PASC patients had not been vaccinated. The most common reasons for postponing the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were fear of worsening PASC symptoms (55.9%) and the belief that vaccination was contraindicated because of PASC (15.6%). Conclusion: Our study suggests that SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is well tolerated in the majority of PASC patients and has good immunogenicity. Disseminating these reassuring data might prove crucial to increasing vaccine coverage in patients with PASC.

Adapting patient and public involvement in patient-oriented methods research: Reflections in a Canadian setting during COVID-19

Background

Processes of the patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research shifted quickly during 2020. Faced with large‐scale issues, such as the COVID‐19 pandemic, the need to adapt processes of PPI to uphold commitments to nurturing the practice of ‘nothing about us without us’ in research has been urgent and profound. We describe how processes of PPI in research on patient‐oriented methods of knowledge translation and implementation science were adapted by four teams in a Canadian setting.

Methods

As part of an ongoing quality improvement self‐study to enhance PPI within these teams, team members shared their experiences of PPI in the context of this pivotal year during interviews and facilitated discussions. Drawing on these experiences, we outline challenges and reflections for adapting processes of PPI in health research on methods in times of urgency, conflict and fast‐moving change.

Discussion

Our reflections offer insight into common issues encountered across teams that may be amplified during times of rapid change, including handling change and uncertainty, sustaining relationship‐building and hearing differing perspectives in processes of PPI.

Conclusion

These learnings present an opportunity to help others active in or planning patient‐oriented methods research to reflect on the changing nature of PPI and how to adapt PPI processes in response to turbulent situations in the future.

The key reflections presented draw heavily from perspectives shared by eight patient and public partners in interviews and facilitated discussions (the conduct and analysis of data in the quality improvement self‐study).

General practice responses to opioid prescribing feedback: a qualitative process evaluation

BACKGROUND

The rise in opioid prescribing in primary care represents a significant public health challenge, associated with increased psychosocial problems, hospitalisations, and mortality. An evidence-based bimonthly feedback intervention to reduce opioid prescribing was developed and implemented, targeting 316 general practices in West Yorkshire over 1 year.

AIM

To understand how general practice staff received and responded to the feedback intervention.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative process evaluation involving semi-structured interviews, guided by Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), of primary care healthcare professionals targeted by feedback.

METHOD

Participants were purposively recruited according to baseline opioid prescribing levels and degree of change following feedback. Interview data were coded to NPT constructs, and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 21 staff from 20 practices. Reducing opioid prescribing was recognised as a priority. While high achievers had clear structures for quality improvement, feedback encouraged some less structured practices to embed changes. The non-prescriptive nature of the feedback reports allowed practices to develop strategies consistent with their own ways of working and existing resources. Practice concerns were allayed by the credibility of the reports and positive experiences of reducing opioid prescribing. The scale, frequency, and duration of feedback may have ensured a good overall level of practice population reach.

CONCLUSION

The intervention engaged general practice staff in change by targeting an issue of emerging concern, and allowing adaption to different ways of working. Practice efforts to reduce opioid prescribing were reinforced by regular feedback, credible comparative data showing progress, and shared experiences of patient benefit.

Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation

BACKGROUND

Health services have traditionally been developed to focus on specific diseases or medical specialties. Involving consumers as partners in planning, delivering and evaluating health services may lead to services that are person-centred and so better able to meet the needs of and provide care for individuals. Globally, governments recommend consumer involvement in healthcare decision-making at the systems level, as a strategy for promoting person-centred health services. However, the effects of this 'working in partnership' approach to healthcare decision-making are unclear. Working in partnership is defined here as collaborative relationships between at least one consumer and health provider, meeting jointly and regularly in formal group formats, to equally contribute to and collaborate on health service-related decision-making in real time. In this review, the terms 'consumer' and 'health provider' refer to partnership participants, and 'health service user' and 'health service provider' refer to trial participants. This review of effects of partnership interventions was undertaken concurrently with a Cochrane Qualitative Evidence Synthesis (QES) entitled Consumers and health providers working in partnership for the promotion of person-centred health services: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership, as an intervention to promote person-centred health services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases from 2000 to April 2019; PROQUEST Dissertations and Theses Global from 2016 to April 2019; and grey literature and online trial registries from 2000 until September 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs of 'working in partnership' interventions meeting these three criteria: both consumer and provider participants meet; they meet jointly and regularly in formal group formats; and they make actual decisions that relate to the person-centredness of health service(s).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened most titles and abstracts. One review author screened a subset of titles and abstracts (i.e. those identified through clinical trials registries searches, those classified by the Cochrane RCT Classifier as unlikely to be an RCT, and those identified through other sources). Two review authors independently screened all full texts of potentially eligible articles for inclusion. In case of disagreement, they consulted a third review author to reach consensus. One review author extracted data and assessed risk of bias for all included studies and a second review author independently cross-checked all data and assessments. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion, or by consulting a third review author to reach consensus. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the small number of included trials and their heterogeneity; we synthesised results descriptively by comparison and outcome. We reported the following outcomes in GRADE 'Summary of findings' tables: health service alterations; the degree to which changed service reflects health service user priorities; health service users' ratings of health service performance; health service users' health service utilisation patterns; resources associated with the decision-making process; resources associated with implementing decisions; and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials (one RCT and four cluster-RCTs), with 16,257 health service users and more than 469 health service providers as trial participants. For two trials, the aims of the partnerships were to directly improve the person-centredness of health services (via health service planning, and discharge co-ordination). In the remaining trials, the aims were indirect (training first-year medical doctors on patient safety) or broader in focus (which could include person-centredness of health services that targeted the public/community, households or health service delivery to improve maternal and neonatal mortality). Three trials were conducted in high income-countries, one was in a middle-income country and one was in a low-income country. Two studies evaluated working in partnership interventions, compared to usual practice without partnership (Comparison 1); and three studies evaluated working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention, compared to the same intervention without partnership (Comparison 2). No studies evaluated one form of working in partnership compared to another (Comparison 3). The effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership compared to usual practice without partnership are uncertain: only one of the two studies that assessed this comparison measured health service alteration outcomes, and data were not usable, as only intervention group data were reported. Additionally, none of the included studies evaluating this comparison measured the other primary or secondary outcomes we sought for the 'Summary of findings' table. We are also unsure about the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention compared to the same intervention without partnership. Very low-certainty evidence indicated there may be little or no difference on health service alterations or health service user health service performance ratings (two studies); or on health service user health service utilisation patterns and adverse events (one study each). No studies evaluating this comparison reported the degree to which health service alterations reflect health service user priorities, or resource use. Overall, our confidence in the findings about the effects of working in partnership interventions was very low due to indirectness, imprecision and publication bias, and serious concerns about risk of selection bias; performance bias, detection bias and reporting bias in most studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of consumers and providers working in partnership as an intervention, or as part of a multi-component intervention, are uncertain, due to a lack of high-quality evidence and/or due to a lack of studies. Further well-designed RCTs with a clear focus on assessing outcomes directly related to partnerships for patient-centred health services are needed in this area, which may also benefit from mixed-methods and qualitative research to build the evidence base.

The Value of Cognitive Pretesting: Improving Validity and Revealing Blind Spots through the Development of a Newborn Screening Parent Experiences Survey

Surveys are used to gather a range of data on newborn screening (NBS) processes. We describe the development of a survey about parents' NBS experiences, in the United States, informed by cognitive pretest interviews among parents with varying NBS test results (true-positive, false-positive, normal). Cognitive pretest interviews were conducted following a semi-structured script and notes were taken to identify problematic survey items. The study team met weekly to discuss pretest feedback, draft changes, and generate revised items. Pretests indicated that parent experiences with NBS are varied and NBS screening procedures are not well understood. Substantial modifications were made to survey questions concerning NBS testing and result communication. Pretesters often associated NBS with other tests/exams/scales-APGAR scores, Ages and Stages questionnaires, and genetic testing during pregnancy. Some pretesters recalled receiving NBS blood spot results during their hospital admission, an uncommon practice, and few recalled knowing results would be provided to them or their pediatrician in the first few weeks of life. Thorough explanations regarding NBS procedures and expectations were embedded within the survey to enhance and improve interpretation of survey questions. Future NBS experience surveys should utilize cognitive pretesting to capture divergent experiences and improve response validity.

The value of involving patients and public in health services research and evaluation: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Public and Patient Involvement, Engagement and Participation research encompasses working with patients/service users (people with a medical condition receiving health service treatment), public members, caregivers and communities (who use services or care for patients). The Partner Priority Programme (PPP) was developed by the National Health Service [NHS] and National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care [NIHR CLAHRC] NWC to share information and experience on evaluating new services being offered to patients that were seeking to reduce health inequalities, improve people's health and wellbeing and reduce emergency hospital admissions. This paper seeks to explore an approach developed for involving the public as equal partners within the evaluation and decision-making processes of health and social care services research. The aim of this study was to identify how public advisors were included, the impact of their involvement, and how change occurred within the organisations following their involvement.

METHODS

A qualitative approach using focus group discussions was adopted to explore the experiences of two cohorts of participants involved in PPP project teams. Focus groups were held with public advisors (n = 9), interns (n = 9; staff or public who received a funded internship for a PPP project), NHS and Local Authority initiative leads (n = 10), and academic facilitators (n = 14). These were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-two public advisors were recruited to support 25 PPP projects across the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and CLAHRC North West Coast [NWC] partner organisations. Three inter-related themes were conceptualised: 1)"Where it all started - involving public advisors" identified the varying journeys to recruitment and experiences of becoming a public advisor; 2)"Steps toward active involvement and engagement" related to public advisors becoming core team members; and 3) "Collaborative working to enhance public and patient involvement" relayed how projects identified the benefits of working jointly with the public advisors, particularly for those who had not experienced this style of working before.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that the PPP model is effective for embedding Public and Patient Involvement [PPI] within health services research, and recommends that PPI is integrated at the earliest opportunity within research projects and service evaluations through the use of support-led and facilitative programmes.

The INSPIRE Population Survey: development, dissemination and respondent characteristics

BACKGROUND

Most older adults prefer to continue living at home despite increasing care needs and demand for services. To aid in maintaining independence, integrated care models for community-dwelling older people are promoted as the most cost-effective approach. The implementation of such care models is challenging and often the end-users are not involved or their needs are not considered. We conducted a population survey in order to understand the needs and preferences of home-dwelling older adults living in Canton Basel-Landschaft, Switzerland. The aims of this paper are to chronicle the development of the INSPIRE Population Survey, outline its variables and measurements, describe the marketing strategy utilized for survey dissemination and report on the response rate and respondent characteristics.

METHODS

The INSPIRE Population Survey, conducted between March and August 2019, is a cross-sectional survey of older adults aged 75 and older living at home in Canton Basel-Landschaft. The questionnaire was developed by expert input and stakeholder involvement. Its readability and acceptability were pilot-tested with older people. To ensure the likelihood of a high and representative response rate, a meticulous step-by-step marketing strategy was developed prior to the dissemination of the questionnaire.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 30.7% (n = 8,846), with variations between 20.6 and 34.5% across the different care regions in the canton. A generally higher response rate was found in the care regions with a higher density and which bordered the urban city of Basel. We received support from local stakeholders, policy makers and media through using a broad combination of marketing channels and targeting our community partners who have a strong relationship with our target audience.

CONCLUSIONS

Although recruiting older adults in research is challenging, our study shows that a high response rate can be achieved by developing the survey through expert input and by involving all important stakeholders, including older adults, throughout the entire process.

Engaging consumers in health research: a narrative review

Objective Consumer and community engagement (CCE) in research is increasingly valued in a contemporary healthcare environment that seeks to genuinely partner with consumers and the wider community. Although there is widespread agreement at research governance levels as to the benefits of CCE in research, there is little available research-based guidance as to how best to proceed with CCE organisationally and how to manage and overcome barriers. The aim of this narrative review was to draw together the available research, review findings and relevant governance-related material and to discuss these in light of a case series among research-engaged consumers in order to chart a practical way forward. Methods A narrative literature review about CCE in research was conducted. Following this, a case series among seven consumers who had been engaged as partners in health research was conducted. Finally, the lived experience of these consumers was explored against the findings of the narrative review. Results In all, 121 papers were identified and reviewed, 37 of which were used to inform the content of this paper. The most important benefits of CCE to both consumers and healthcare researchers were related to improvements in trust between consumer and researchers, and the increased relevance and ethics of research agendas ultimately pursued. Barriers to CCE were found to be pragmatic, attitudinal and organisational. Enabling factors that capitalise on the benefits and help address the barriers to meaningful CCE are outlined and discussed in light of a case series conducted among research-engaged consumers in Australia and internationally. Conclusion Best practice standards, organisational commitments and resources are needed to improve the status quo in Australia and to provide health research end-users with research outcomes that better align with their priorities and needs. What is known about the topic? Consumer and community engagement (CCE) in research is increasing in prevalence and is likely to be beneficial to both consumers and healthcare providers and researchers. What does this paper add? Following review of the available research findings and governance statements about CCE, enabling strategies are presented in light of a case series among Sydney-based research-engaged consumers. What are the implications for practitioners? Barriers to consumer and community engagement can be overcome if well understood and tackled organisationally. The potential benefits of shifting to a fully consumer- or community-engaged healthcare research environment are multifactorial and represent a paradigm shift in favour of evidence-based patient and family-centred care.