Patient and public involvement in health research: ethical imperative and/or radical challenge?

Co-Designing a Digital App to Support Young People's Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (VoiceIn): Development and Usability Study

Background

While patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is now seen as a cornerstone of mental health research, young people's involvement in PPIE faces limitations. Work and school demands and more limited independence can make it challenging for young people to engage with PPIE. Lack of ability or desire to attend face-to-face meetings or group discussions can further compound this difficulty. The VoiceIn app and digital platform were codeveloped by a multidisciplinary team of young people, mental health researchers, and software designers, and enables young people to engage directly with PPIE opportunities via a mobile app.

Objective

This paper aims to describe how VoiceIn was developed through a series of co-design workshops with relevant stakeholders, specifically (1) how the initial design of VoiceIn was informed and driven by focus groups with young people, mental health professionals, and PPIE leads; (2) how VoiceIn was refined through collaboration with the aforementioned stakeholders; (3) the priorities for an app to support PPIE; (4) the key features necessary in the PPIE app; and (5) the recommended next steps in testing and deploying the digital platform.

Methods

Initial co-design workshops took place with young people, mental health professionals, and PPIE leads to identify key features of an app to support PPIE. A series of VoiceIn design prototypes were developed and iterated based on the priorities and preferences of the stakeholders. The MoSCoW (must have, should have, could have, won't have) prioritization method was used throughout the process to identify priorities across the different stakeholder groups.

Results

Co-design with young people, mental health professionals, and PPIE leads supported the successful development and improvement of the VoiceIn app. As a result of this process, key features were identified, including allowing for various modes of providing feedback (eg, polls and comments), reviewing project updates, and expressing interest in categories of research. The researcher platform was developed to support multimedia uploads for project descriptions; a jargon detector; a dedicated section for providing project updates; and a visually appealing, user-friendly design. While all stakeholder groups emphasized the importance of allowing app users to engage with the app in various ways and for there to be ongoing progress updates, group differences were also noticed. Young people expressed a desire for incentives and rewards for engaging with the app (eg, to post on their public social media profiles), and mental health professionals and PPIE leads prioritized flexibility in describing the project and its PPIE needs.

Conclusions

A co-design approach was pivotal to the development of the VoiceIn app. This collaborative approach enabled the app to meet the divergent needs of young people, mental health professionals, and PPIE leads. This process mirrored the aspirations of PPIE initiatives by cocreating a digital health research tool with key stakeholders.

Health and wellbeing of survivors of sexual violence and abuse attending sexual assault referral centres in England: the MESARCH mixed-methods evaluation

Background

One million people in England and Wales experience sexual violence and abuse each year, with nearly half experiencing serious sexual offences; around 30,000 survivors access sexual assault referral centres.

Objectives

This research was commissioned by National Institute for Health and Care Research to evaluate access, interventions and care pathways for survivors, especially those provided through sexual assault referral centres.

Design, setting, participants

The sexual assault referral centres care pathway was investigated through six sub-studies. There were two Cochrane Reviews (4274 participants). Seventy-two providers and 5 survivors were interviewed at eight sites; the children and young people study involved 12 participants from two sexual assault referral centres. A cohort study involving three-wave data collection over 1 year (21 sites; 2602 service users screened, 337 recruited) used a multilevel modelling framework to explore risk factors for burden of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms at baseline and change at 1 year. We analysed costs and outcomes and conducted a narrative analysis (41 survivors). We worked closely with survivors and prioritised the safety/welfare of participants and researchers.

Results

Cochrane Reviews identified large effects from psychosocial interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Sexual assault referral centres delivered a high-quality frontline service for survivors but groups experiencing domestic abuse and some ethnic and cultural minorities were under-represented. The qualitative research emphasised inter-agency collaboration for survivor benefit. The cohort study identified a risk 'triad' of adverse childhood experiences, poor mental health and economic deprivation, which was associated with baseline trauma burden. There were important improvements in trauma symptoms a year later. These improvements were unrelated to different sexual assault referral centre models. Costs and other outcomes were also similar across models. Harmful policing and justice practices/procedures were identified by 25% of participants. In this context, trauma-competent interviewing techniques, regular/timely updates and conveying case decisions with care signalled good practice.

Limitations

The cohort study lacked a comparison group, reducing confidence in the finding that access to sexual assault referral centres explained the reduction observed in post-traumatic stress disorder.

Conclusions and future work

Barriers to access call for concerted efforts to implement trauma-informed universal health services. The risk 'triad' underscores the value of holistic approaches to care at sexual assault referral centres and timely follow-on care. Poor mental health was the main barrier to service access beyond sexual assault referral centres. The persistence of trauma symptoms a year after accessing sexual assault referral centres signals urgent need for tackling counselling wait-lists, expanding support options and commitment to lifelong care. Multidisciplinary evaluation of sexual assault referral centres for better health provides a foundation for advancing trauma-informed practices in the context of sexual violence and abuse.

Study registration

This study is registered as ISRCTN30846825 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN30846825.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 16/117/04) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 35. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Developing a person-centered stated preference survey for dementia with Lewy bodies: value of a personal and public involvement process

Introduction

The development of high-quality stated preference (SP) surveys requires a rigorous design process involving engagement with representatives from the target population. However, while transparency in the reporting of the development of SP surveys is encouraged, few studies report on this process and the outcomes. Recommended stages of instrument development includes both steps for stakeholder/end-user engagement and pretesting. Pretesting typically involves interviews, often across multiple waves, with improvements made at each wave; pretesting is therefore resource intensive. The aims of this paper are to report on the outcomes of collaboration with a Lewy body dementia research advisory group during the design phase of a SP survey. We also evaluate an alternative approach to instrument development, necessitated by a resource constrained context.

Method

The approach involved conducting the stages of end-user engagement and pretesting together during a public involvement event. A hybrid approach involving a focus group with breakout interviews was employed. Feedback from contributors informed the evolution of the survey instrument.

Results

Changes to the survey instrument were organized into four categories: attribute modifications; choice task presentation and understanding; information presentation, clarity and content; and best-best scaling presentation. The hybrid approach facilitated group brainstorming while still allowing the researcher to assess the feasibility of choice tasks in an interview setting. However, greater individual exploration and the opportunity to trial iterative improvements across waves was not feasible with this approach.

Discussion

Involvement of the research advisory group resulted in a more person-centered survey design. In a context constrained by time and budget, and with consideration of the capacity and vulnerability of the target population, the approach taken was a feasible and pragmatic mechanism for improving the design of a SP survey.

Active involvement in scientific research of persons living with dementia and long-term care users: a systematic review of existing methods with a specific focus on good practices, facilitators and barriers of involvement

BACKGROUND

Active involvement of persons living with dementia (PLWD) and long-term care (LTC) users in research is essential but less developed compared to other patient groups. However, their involvement in research is not only important but also feasible. This study aims to provide an overview of methods, facilitators, and barriers for involving PLWD and LTC users in scientific research.

METHODS

A systematic literature search across 12 databases in December 2020 identified studies involving PLWD, LTC users, or their carers beyond research subjects and describing methods or models for involvement. Qualitative descriptions of involvement methods underwent a risk of bias assessment using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Checklist 2018. A data collection sheet in Microsoft Excel and thematic analysis were used to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

The eighteen included studies delineated five core involvement methods spanning all research phases: advisory groups, formal and informal research team meetings, action groups, workshops, and co-conducting interviews. Additionally, two co-research models with PLWD and carers were found, while only two studies detailed LTC user involvement methods. Four distinct involvement roles were identified: consulting and advisory roles, co-analysts, co-researchers, and partners. The review also addressed barriers, facilitators, and good practices in the preparation, execution, and translation phases of research, emphasizing the importance of diversity, bias reduction, and resource allocation. Trust-building, clear roles, ongoing training, and inclusive support were highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

Planning enough time for active involvement is important to ensure that researchers have time to build a trusting relationship and meet personal needs and preferences of PLWD, LTC users and carers. Researchers are advised not to presume the meaning of burden and to avoid a deficit perspective. A flexible or emergent design could aid involved persons' ownership of the research process.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero 2021: CRD42021253736.

A patienthood that transcends the patient: An analysis of patient research partners' narratives of involvement in a Canadian arthritis patient advisory board

OBJECTIVES

Incorporating the perspectives of patients and public into the conduct of research has the potential to make scientific research more democratic. This paper explores how being a patient partner on an arthritis patient advisory board shapes the patienthood of a person living with arthritis.

METHODS

An analysis was undertaken of the narratives of 22 patient research partners interviewed about their experiences on the Arthritis Patient Advisory Board (APAB), based in Vancouver, Canada.

RESULTS

Participants' motivations to become involved in APAB stemmed largely from their desire to change their relationship with their condition. APAB was a living collective project in which participants invested their hope, both for their own lives as patients and for others with the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight how the journeys of patient partners connect and integrate seemingly disparate conceptions of what it means to be a patient. One's experience as a clinical 'patient' transforms into the broader notion of civic patienthood.

A collective autoethnography of coproduction in mental health research by academic researchers and young people in Brazil

INTRODUCTION

Coproduction of mental health research and interventions involving researchers and young people is increasingly common. However, this model raises challenges, related, for instance, to communication, power and control. This paper narrates-from a collective first-person perspective-the lived experience of coproduction of a digital intervention by institutional researchers and young citizen researchers in Brazil.

METHOD

This study employed a collaborative autoethnographic methodology, utilising autobiographical data such as meeting recordings, individual notes and collective guided reflections on the coproduction process. Our analysis focused on challenges and solutions that arose during the process.

RESULTS

Throughout the project, we created formal and informal mechanisms for accountability, transparency and fair inclusion of multiple voices. We engaged in mutual capacity-building, invested in building interpersonal knowledge, and implemented practices to reduce overload and promote equitable participation. Through ongoing reflection and readjustment in response to challenges, we progressively embraced more democratic and egalitarian values. The collective care invested in the process fostered synergy, trust, and intergroup friendship.

CONCLUSION

Our experience points to the value of creating a space for multiple research identities: the citizen young person and the institutional researcher, both of whom critically reflect on their roles in the research process. Our focus on coproduced care calls into question participation metaphors that represent the process via a single axis-young people-who linearly progress from minimal participation to full autonomy. Instead, our analysis highlights the importance of a social and caring bond that supports the radical co-production of innovative health solutions in contexts of vulnerability.

Youth partnership in suicide prevention research: moving beyond the safety discourse

OBJECTIVE

In this communication article, we discuss coproduction in suicide prevention research, with an emphasis on involving young people. We critically reflect on the lessons we have learned by working alongside young people, and how these lessons may be useful to other research teams.

SUMMARY

The meaningful involvement of young people in the design, implementation and translation of mental health research has received significant attention over the last decade. For most funding bodies, the involvement of patients and the public in the planning and delivery of research is advised and, in many cases, mandatory. When it comes to suicide prevention research, however, things are slightly different in practice. Involvement of young people in suicide prevention research has often been considered a controversial, unfeasible and even risky endeavour. In our experiences of working in this field, such concerns are expressed by funders, Higher Education Health and Safety committees and practitioners. By presenting an example from our research where the involvement of young people as experts by experience was integral, we highlight key lessons learnt that could maximise the potential of youth partnership in suicide prevention research. These lessons take on particular importance in mental health research against the background of long-entrenched power differences and the silencing of service user voices. Professional knowledge, obtained through education and vocational training, has historically taken priority over experiential knowledge obtained through lived experience, in psychiatric practice and research. Although this hierarchy has widely been challenged, any account of coproduction in mental health research is positioned against that background, and the remnants of those inequitable power relationships arguably take on greater resonance in suicide prevention research and require careful consideration to ensure meaningful involvement.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that progress in suicide research cannot be fulfilled without the meaningful involvement of, and partnership with, young people with lived experience.

Involving carer advisors in evidence synthesis to improve carers' mental health during end-of-life home care: co-production during COVID-19 remote working

Background

Family carers play a central role in supporting people at the end of life, but often suffer detrimental impacts on their own mental health as a result. This project conducted evidence synthesis of research into factors that may affect carers' mental health to help identify ways of maintaining their mental health. It worked closely with a carer Review Advisory Panel to help ensure the findings made sense and were communicated meaningfully from the carers' perspective.

Aim

To present: (1) principles and components that facilitated successful patient and public involvement in an evidence synthesis project to help inform patient and public involvement in similar projects; (2) recommendations for carer support that were instigated and produced by the Review Advisory Panel.

Process and principles

Nine Review Advisory Panel meetings including four to five carers, a lay Chair and three researchers were held. Solid 'groundwork' was invested in recruitment and relationship-building prior to meetings, and it was ensured that there was agreement of how to work together and clarification of expectations at the first meeting. Key meeting principles were: having a majority of carers, and a Chair with both carer and patient and public involvement experience, to ensure carer voices remained at the fore substantial researcher representation, including the project lead, to highlight the value placed on Review Advisory Panel meetings flexibility to follow carers' agendas, enabling 'space to talk' and 'space to change' appropriate and prompt carer payment, again emphasising patient and public involvement value to the project. Added general principles were: ongoing training, ample funded time for Review Advisory Panel preparation and ongoing communication outside meetings. COVID moved all meetings online after the first meeting, but the principles were maintained.

Outputs

The project saw an evolution from patient and public involvement consultation to co-production. The main patient and public involvement output was recommendations for supporting carers based on project findings, instigated and produced by the Review Advisory Panel.

Reflection on successful components and challenges

Five carers (including the Chair) and six researchers responded to questions by e-mail. Analysis by one researcher, aided by two other researchers, was then reviewed by all participants and revised. Both carers and researchers felt the components that made the patient and public involvement work were: (1) a shared sense of purpose of and gains from the Review Advisory Panel; (2) personal gains; (3) mutual commitment and respect; and (4) bridging between academic and lay perspectives, through investment in training, ensuring carers were able to meaningfully comment, and continuous negotiation and compromise. Challenges were that the COVID-induced move from face-to-face to online meetings reduced informality, flexibility, personal connection and non-verbal communication. However, earlier groundwork facilitated group resilience to these challenges. Patient and public involvement representation on the wider Research Management Group proved less successful, flagging the importance of negotiating and defining patient and public involvement roles at all project levels.

Conclusion

The patient and public involvement principles employed, including meeting composition and chairing, and flexibility to follow carers' agendas, appeared to facilitate the evolution from consultation to co-production of carer recommendations, but require further testing. Preconditions for successful remote working should be further investigated, as the different advantages of face-to-face and virtual meetings may be combined through hybrid working. The iterative and responsive working required for genuine co-production may require more flexible patient and public involvement funding models.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO registration 2019 CRD42019130279 at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (grant 18/01/01) and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Co-learning commentary: a patient partner perspective in mental health care research

BACKGROUND

Although including patients as full, active members of research teams is becoming more common, there are few accounts about how to do so successfully, and almost none of these are written by patient partners themselves. Three patient partners contributed their lived experience to a three-year, multi-component mental health research project in British Columbia, Canada. As patient partners, we contributed to innovative co-learning in this project, resulting in mutual respect and wide-ranging benefits. To guide future patient partners and researchers seeking patient engagement, we outline the processes that helped our research team 'get it right'.

MAIN BODY

From the outset, we were integrated into components of the project that we chose: thematically coding a rapid review, developing questions and engagement processes for focus groups, and shaping an economic model. Our level of engagement in each component was determined by us. Additionally, we catalyzed the use of surveys to evaluate our engagement and the perceptions of patient engagement from the wider team. At our request, we had a standing place on each monthly meeting agenda. Importantly, we broke new ground when we moved the team from using previously accepted psychiatric terminology that no longer fit the reality of patients' experiences. We worked diligently with the team to represent the reality that was appropriate for all parties. The approach taken in this project led to meaningful and successfully integrated patient experiences, fostered a shared understanding, which positively impacted team development and cohesion. The resulting 'lessons learned' included engaging early, often, and with respect; carving out and creating a safe place, free from stigma; building trust within the research team; drawing on lived experience; co-creating acceptable terminology; and cultivating inclusivity throughout the entire study.

CONCLUSION

We believe that lived experience can and should go hand-in-hand with research, to ensure study outcomes reflect the knowledge of patients themselves. We were willing to share the truth of our lived experience. We were treated as co-researchers. Successful engagement came from the 'lessons learned' that can be used by other teams who wish to engage patient partners in health research.

A balance between putting on the researcher's hat and being a fellow human being: a researcher perspective on informal carer involvement in health and social care research

BACKGROUND

Public involvement in health and social care research is increasingly prioritized by policy-makers and research funders. Often, the impact of the involvement is described in terms of how it has contributed to the research outcomes and how it has affected the involved members of the public. There is a dearth of studies reporting from the perspective of researchers themselves of having involved members of the public in their research. Nevertheless, there is a general expectation for researchers to accept and embrace public involvement in research. This study aims to explore researchers' views of involving informal carers in health and social care research.

METHODS

Eleven individual in-depth interviews with researchers in the fields of social work, caring science, health science and medical science constituted the dataset of this qualitative study, inspired by discourse psychology.

RESULTS

The qualitative data analysis resulted in two interpretative repertoires describing researchers' views of involving informal carers in research, "Philosophy of Science" and "Personal relationships and growth". Both repertoires need to be recognized; however, as of today, the Philosophy of Science repertoire is more acknowledged, while the second repertoire describing empathy, relationships and emotions may be viewed as the researcher being "unprofessional". Further, the findings highlighted the dual perspective of being a researcher and a carer as creating opportunities for growth on the part of the researcher, on both a professional and a personal level.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers and their research work would benefit from acknowledging, discussing and reporting both interpretative repertoires in their publications, as well as recognizing the benefit of dialectal positions, for example, having a dual perspective as both a researcher and an informal carer.

The impossibility of engaged research: Complicity and accountability between researchers, 'publics' and institutions

Over the past decade, U.K. universities have increasingly sought to involve publics in research as active participants in the construction of academic knowledge. Sociologists of health have largely welcomed this enthusiasm for engaged and participatory ways of working, including methodologies long in use in the field such as patient-led research and co-creation. Despite the strong interest in engaged research, however, we argue that funding patterns, bureaucratic structures and an overreliance on people employed on casual contracts make it extremely difficult, often impossible, to do engaged research in British universities. Drawing on our own experiences, we show how our attempts to practise and deepen accountability to variously situated publics were constrained by the way our institution imagined and materially supported engagement. We argue that it falls to individual researchers to mitigate or work around structural barriers to engagement, and that this process creates dilemmas of complicity. If engaged research is to fulfil its remit for inclusion and its radical potential, researchers need to think carefully about how the U.K. engagement agenda entwines with processes of casualisation, acceleration and projectification, and how institutional recuperations of engagement can undermine its political and epistemic objectives.

"They make a difference": a qualitative study of providers' experiences of peer support in outpatient clinics for people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Although the life expectancy of people living with HIV has increased, they are still often disconnected from society through stigma and discrimination. Peer support has been found to increase social support. Given the limited research on peer support from the providers' perspective, this study explored how peer supporters experience their roles and contributions in outpatient clinics (OPCs). Additionally, healthcare professionals' perceptions of working with peer supporters in OPCs were examined.  METHODS: This qualitative study included purposively selected peer supporters (n = 10) and healthcare professionals (n = 5) from five OPCs in Norway in 2020. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted in Norwegian or English, using interview guides. Interview transcripts were analysed in NVivo 12 using reflexive and collaborative thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The results show that peer supporters experience mutual support through emotional and honest interactions. Further, the peer supporters found it essential to negotiate with the service users about their preconception of HIV, confront their views through dialogue, and replicate positive experiences by being credible role models. The participants expressed that integrating peer support in the OPCs' usual care processes increased the prospect of equitable services. Quality of peer support and role clarity were identified as critical components. The results demonstrate that emotional and honest conversations promote support between peers and that peer supporters identify a need for a reframed understanding of HIV by modelling plausible alternative interpretations and coping experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to knowledge on how peer support can meet the needs of people living with HIV. Incorporating people living with HIV in the co-production and distribution of healthcare services may improve the knowledge and perspectives in healthcare services. However, the skill standards of peer supporters should be addressed when implementing peer support in usual care.

The importance of children and young person involvement in scoping the need for a paediatric glucocorticoid-associated patient reported outcome measure

Background

For many children and young people (CYP) with paediatric rheumatic conditions, glucocorticoid medications and their associated side-effects have a substantial impact on disease experience. Whilst there are physician-rated measures of glucocorticoid toxicity, no parallel patient reported measure has been developed to date for CYP with rheumatic disease. This manuscript describes a series of public patient involvement (PPI) events to inform the development of a future paediatric glucocorticoid-associated patient reported outcome measure (PROM).

Methods

One large group PPI event was advertised to CYP with experience of glucocorticoid medication use and their parents through clinicians, charities and existing PPI groups. This featured education on the team’s research into glucocorticoid medication and interactive polls/structured discussion to help participants share their experiences. Further engagement was sought for PPI group work to co-develop future glucocorticoid studies, including development of a glucocorticoid associated PROM. Quantitative and qualitative feedback was collected from online questionnaires. The initiative was held virtually due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Results

Nine families (n = 15) including 6 CYP joined the large group PPI event. Online pre-attendance and post-attendance questionnaires showed improvement in mean self-reported confidence [1 = not at all confident, 5 = very confident] in the following: what steroid medications are (pre = 3.9, post = 4.8), steroid side effects (pre = 3.8, post = 4.6), patient-reported outcome measures (pre = 2.0, post = 4.5), available research on steroids (pre = 2.2, post = 3.5). Five families (n = 7) were involved in a monthly PPI group who worked alongside the research team to identify priorities in glucocorticoid research, produce age-appropriate study materials, identify barriers to study participation (e.g. accessibility & convenience) and recommend appropriate modalities for dissemination. The participants found discussing shared experiences and learning about research to be the most enjoyable aspects of the initiative.

Conclusions

This PPI initiative provided a valuable forum for families, including young children, to share their perspectives. Here, the authors explore the effective use of PPI in a virtual setting and provide a unique case study for the involvement of CYP in PROM development. The monthly PPI group also identified a need for the development of a new PROM related to glucocorticoid medication use and provided unique insights into how such a study could be structured.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41927-022-00312-9.

An Introduction to Engaged Phenomenology

In this article, I introduce engaged phenomenology as an approach through which phenomenologists can more explicitly and critically consider the generative conditions and implications of their research. I make an explicit link between philosophical insights from critical and generative phenomenology and the ethical and methodological insights offered by engaged research methods-a community-oriented approach to the generation of shared understanding for the mutual benefit of all stakeholders in research. The article consists of (a) a review of these respective strands of inquiry, (b) an overview and critique of mainstream qualitative methodologies in phenomenology, and (c) suggestions for those interested in working through engaged phenomenology as an approach to both theory and research praxis.

User-Focused Monitoring as a Strategy for Involvement and Mental Health Service Development: An Analysis of Swedish Monitoring Reports

User-focused monitoring (UFM) is a method of evaluating mental health services, conducted by people with lived experience of mental ill health. Research on UFM and on user involvement focused on service monitoring and evaluation is lacking. This study addresses this knowledge gap by examining UFM as a strategy for user involvement. More specifically, this study aims to synthesize patterns in UFM reports to characterize the phenomenon, as well as to further discuss negotiation processes and political opportunities in UFM. The empirical material consists of 136 Swedish UFM reports that have been analyzed in two steps: All reports were mapped according to general characteristics and a sample of 20 reports were selected to provide additional information on the method. This study has been conducted in collaboration with actors representing the user movement and municipality-based mental health services. Our analysis shows that long-term contracts between user organizations and service providers are important to create a sustainable implementation of UFM. However, strategies to protect user autonomy must be carefully considered and employed in relation to such collaborations. We further highlight the risks of a restricted focus on consumer satisfaction, and discuss the current development towards including follow-ups in the UFM process as a strategy for counteracting tokenism.

A Qualitative Exploration of Stakeholder Involvement in Decision-Making for Alcohol Treatment and Prevention Services

The concept of providing individuals with a ‘voice’ via stakeholder involvement has been advocated within English health care policy for several decades. Stakeholder involvement encourages people affected by an issue to contribute to planning and decision making regarding treatment and care, inclusive of providers and recipients of care. This paper explores stakeholder involvement in the design and delivery of public health alcohol services. A qualitative case study approach was adopted, including in-depth interviews with 11 alcohol commissioners, 10 alcohol service providers and 6 general practitioners plus three facilitated focus groups with 31 alcohol service users. Findings show that most participants were aware of, and could name, various methods of stakeholder involvement that they had engaged with; however, the extent and impact of stakeholder involvement in decision making are not transparent. It is essential that a deeper understanding is generated of the different roles that stakeholders can play within the entire decision-making process to maximise its utility.

Patient and public involvement in a UK National Institute for Health Research Programme Grant for Applied Research: experiences from the Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study (CHESS)

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) plays a crucial role in ensuring research is carried out in conjunction with the people that it will impact upon. In this article, we present our experiences and reflections from working collaboratively with patients and public through the lifetime of an National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) programme grant; the Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study (CHESS) which took place between 2015 and 2020.

PPI OVER THE COURSE OF CHESS

We worked closely with three leading UK migraine charities and a lay advisory group throughout the programme. We followed NIHR standards and used the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public checklist. We consulted our PPI contacts using a variety of methods depending on the phase of the study and the nature of the request. This included emails, discussions, and face-to-face contact.PPI members contributed throughout the study in the programme development, in the grant application, ethics documentation, and trial oversight. During the feasibility study; in supporting the development of a classification interview for chronic headache by participating in a headache classification conference, assessing the relevance, and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures by helping to analyse cognitive interview data, and testing the smartphone application making suggestions on how best to present the summary of data collected for participants. Due to PPI contribution, the content and duration of the study intervention were adapted and a Delphi study with consensus meeting developed a core outcome set for migraine studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The involvement of the public and patients in CHESS has allowed us to shape its overall design, intervention development, and establish a core outcome set for future migraine studies. We have reflected on many learning points for the future application of PPI.

Exploring the Dynamics of a Research Partnership in a Co-Operative Inquiry: A Qualitative Study

Establishing a genuine partnership is a prerequisite when service-users become co-researchers. The practices of co-research challenges conventional scientific communities to rethink research processes and to learn to develop a genuine participatory research culture. This analysis investigated how a research partnership was created by exploring small group collaborative processes in a cooperative inquiry dealing with an interview study about psychosocial rehabilitation of elderly individuals bereaved by suicide late in life. The analysis highlighted how reciprocity can facilitate "epistemic user participation" and promote a research outcome that is co-created in a genuine partnership that reflects the perspective of service-users.

Measuring the impact of participatory research in psychiatry: How the search for epistemic justifications obscures ethical considerations

CONTEXT

Both within politics and practice, the field of psychiatry is undergoing a significant transformation, as increasing emphasis is placed on the importance of involving those with lived experience in research. In response to this participatory turn, a push towards measuring the impact of patient involvement is also growing, seeking to identify how participation can improve research.

OBJECTIVE

This paper examines the recent push towards measuring impact in relation to justifications underlying the democratization of research in psychiatry, revealing a disconnect between the two, and harms that could result from a singular focus on measuring impact.

DISCUSSION

While those promoting and regulating participatory research tend to focus on the epistemic benefits of such research, many have pointed to both epistemic and ethical justifications underlying participatory research. The ethical reasons for involving service users loom especially large in psychiatry, given its unique history of abuse, the ways diagnoses can be utilized as tools for oppression, and the prevalence of coercion. The current focus on measuring the impact of involvement can be harmful, in that it obscures ethical reasons in favour of epistemic ones, potentially exacerbating issues common to participatory research, such as role confusion and ineffective, tokenistic participatory efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

We argue that to take the ethical reasons behind involvement in mental health research seriously will involve looking beyond impact and towards sharing power. We suggest three ways this can be done: measuring more than impact, building service user capacities and sharing power in realms outside of research.

Evaluating health service outcomes of public involvement in health service design in high-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Internationally, it is expected that health services will involve the public in health service design. Evaluation of public involvement has typically focused on the process and experiences for participants. Less is known about outcomes for health services. The aim of this systematic review was to a) identify and synthesise what is known about health service outcomes of public involvement and b) document how outcomes were evaluated.

METHODS

Searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL for studies that reported health service outcomes from public involvement in health service design. The review was limited to high-income countries and studies in English. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in health research. Content analysis was used to determine the outcomes of public involvement in health service design and how outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 93 articles were included. The majority were published in the last 5 years, were qualitative, and were located in the United Kingdom. A range of health service outcomes (discrete products, improvements to health services and system/policy level changes) were reported at various levels (service level, across services, and across organisations). However, evaluations of outcomes were reported in less than half of studies. In studies where outcomes were evaluated, a range of methods were used; most frequent were mixed methods. The quality of study design and reporting was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

When reporting public involvement in health service design authors outline a range of outcomes for health services, but it is challenging to determine the extent of outcomes due to inadequate descriptions of study design and poor reporting. There is an urgent need for evaluations, including longitudinal study designs and cost-benefit analyses, to fully understand outcomes from public involvement in health service design.

A Bio-Psycho-Social Co-created Intervention for Young Adults With Multiple Sclerosis (ESPRIMO): Rationale and Study Protocol for a Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS), the most common neurological disease that causes disability in youth, does not only affect physical functions but is also associated with cognitive impairment, fatigue, depression, and anxiety and can significantly impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Since MS is generally diagnosed at a young age-a period of great significance for personal, relational, and professional development-adaptation can become highly challenging. Therefore, enhancing the competence of young people to adaptively cope with these potential challenges is of utmost importance in order to promote their potentialities and talents. It has been shown that psychological interventions targeting MS patients can enhance resilience and HRQoL and that regular physical activity (PA) and social engagement can improve psychological well-being. However, literature on the development of global interventions based on the bio-psycho-social model of the disease is missing. Even less attention has been paid to interventions dedicated to young adults with MS (YawMS) and to the involvement of patients in the development of such programs.

AIMS

In collaboration with MS patients, this study aims to develop a bio-psycho-social intervention (ESPRIMO) for YawMS, aiming to improve their HRQoL and to explore its feasibility, acceptability, and effects.

METHODS

To tailor the intervention to the specific needs of YawMS, "patient engagement principles" will be adopted in the co-creation phase, performing a web survey and focus groups with patients and healthcare professionals. In the intervention phase, a pilot sample of 60 young adults with MS will be enrolled. The co-created intervention, composed of group sessions over a 12-week period, will cover psycho-social strategies and include physical activities. Adopting a longitudinal, pre-post evaluation design, self-report questionnaires measuring HRQoL and other bio-psycho-social features (e.g., resilience, well-being, mindfulness traits, self-efficacy, perceived social support, psychological symptoms, illness perception, committed action, fatigue, attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, motivation, perception of autonomy support for PA, barriers and intentions to PA) will be administered, the quantity and quality of PA will be measured, and a questionnaire developed by the authors will be used to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the ESPRIMO intervention.

"An Active, Productive Life": Narratives of, and Through, Participation in Public and Patient Involvement in Health Research

Public and patient involvement (PPI)-engaging the public in designing and delivering research-is increasingly expected in health research, reflecting recognition of the value of "lay" knowledge of illness and/or caring for informing research. Despite increased understanding of PPI experiences within the research process, little attention has been paid to the meaning of PPI in other areas of contributors' lives, and its value as a broader social practice. We conducted repeated narrative interviews with five experienced PPI contributors from the United Kingdom to explore how meaning is constructed through narratives of PPI in relation to their broader "life-worlds." Narratives were extremely varied, constructing identities and meanings around PPI in relation to family and social life, career and employment, financial status, and wider social agendas, as well as health. This emphasizes the importance of recognizing PPI as a social practice with diverse meaning and value beyond health research.

Experiences of involuntary psychiatric admission decision-making: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of the perspectives of service users, informal carers, and professionals

BACKGROUND

In involuntary psychiatric admission, used globally, professionals or caretakers decide upon hospitalization regardless of what the person with psychosocial disabilities decides. This raises clinical, ethical, legal, and human rights concerns, and it goes against Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). CRPD mandates that member states respect the autonomy of people with disabilities. Through Article 12, it recognizes full enjoyment of legal capacity for persons with disabilities. Implementation of Article 12 is challenging in every country, and exploring all the stakeholders' experiences at admission decision-making will help us to understand the challenges that the current psychiatry system poses for service users to exercise their autonomy and identify the areas where service users need support to have their rights, will, and preferences respected.

AIM

To describe the experiences of service users, informal carers, and professionals in involuntary psychiatric admission decision-making and throughout the subsequent involuntary admission. We explored the support that the service users need to have their rights, will, and preferences respected.

METHOD

A search of twelve databases in medicine, sociology, and law in Danish, English, Japanese, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish, and Swedish was conducted in 2017 and 2018, limited to the past 10 years, using terms such as "involuntary," "admission," "mental illness," and "experience". The search identified 682 articles. Four researchers independently reviewed the articles to find those that completed original qualitative or mixed method studies exploring experiences of involuntary psychiatric admission among adults. We added seven publications from the articles' references, contacted experts in the field (no publications were added), and excluded two articles that were in German. Three researchers analyzed the articles' results using Thematic Analysis (PROSPERO registration number CRD42019072874).

RESULTS

Overall, 37 articles were included from 11 countries; they involved 731 service users, 100 informal carers, and 291 mental health professionals. We identified a lack of communication and a power imbalance among the stakeholders, which was exacerbated by the professionals' attitudes. At admission decision-making, the service users wanted to be heard and wanted to understand the situation. The families felt responsibility for the service users, they were careful not to ruin relationships, and they struggled to obtain support from the mental health system. Professionals believed that threats or harming others should lead to admission regardless of what the service users or their families felt. Professionals sometimes felt that it was not necessary to explain the information to the service users because they would not understand. Professionals were concerned and frustrated with difficulties in coordinating among themselves. During admission, service users struggled with the ward environment and relationship with staff; they most objected to coercion, such as forced medication. Families were frustrated that they were not involved in the treatment planning, especially as the service users moved toward discharge. The professionals often rationalized that coercion was necessary, and they believed that they knew what was best for the service users.

CONCLUSIONS

A lack of communication and a power imbalance among the stakeholders hindered respect for the service users' rights, will, and preferences. This was exacerbated by professionals rationalizing coercion and assuming that service users were incapable of understanding information. Services that encourage communication and overcome power imbalances (e.g. Crisis Plans, Family Group Conferencing) combined with stronger community mental health support will respect service users' rights, will, and preferences and avoid substituted decision-making on issues such as involuntary admission and forced medication.

Exploring patient and public involvement (PPI) and co-production approaches in mental health research: learning from the PARTNERS2 research programme

BACKGROUND

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research is a growing field of work, incorporating experiential knowledge within research processes. Co-production is a more recent PPI approach that emphasises the importance of power-sharing to promote inclusive research practices, valuing and respecting knowledge from different sources, and relationship building. Applying co-production principles in research trials can be difficult, and there are few detailed worked examples or toolkits. This paper explores the successes and challenges encountered by one research team.

METHODS

Our paper is written by a team of 21 people working on PARTNERS2, led by a smaller co-ordinating group. Using a co-operative style inquiry, the authors have reflected on and written about their experiences; analysis of the resulting 15 accounts provided examples of how PPI and co-production were delivered in practice.

RESULTS

We reveal varied and complicated experiences as we developed our collaborative approach across the entire research programme. Four main themes emerge from reflective accounts which describe aspects of this process: (1) recognising the importance of 'emotional work'; (2) developing safe spaces to create and share knowledge; (3) some challenges of using our personal identities in research work; and (4) acknowledging power-sharing within the research hierarchy. We also found continual relationship building, how different forms of expertise were valued, and stigma were central to shaping what work was possible together. Other important practices were transparency, particularly over decision making, and clear communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work provides one example of the 'messy' nature of collaborative research in practice. The learning we surface was contextual, generated within a large-scale research programme, but applicable to other studies. We found for success there needs to be an acknowledgement of the importance of emotional work, creating safe spaces to co-produce, transparency in decision making and reflection on the difficulties of using personal identities in research work including for service user researchers. These elements are more important than existing guidelines suggest. Implementation of actions to support emotional work, will require changes within individual teams as well as institutions. Introducing reflective practice in teams may be helpful in identifying further improvements to inclusive research practice.

Perspectives on public involvement in health research from Singapore: The potential of a supported group model of involvement

Background

Singapore is an international research hub, with an emphasis on translational clinical research. Despite growing evidence of the positive impact of public involvement (PPI) in research, it remains rare in Singapore.

Aims

To investigate Singaporean public perspectives around the rationale, role and scope for being involved in health research

To identify the potential, challenges, facilitators and strategies for implementing PPI in Singapore.

Design

Semi‐structured qualitative interviews with members of the public, analysed using thematic framework analysis.

Results

Twenty people participated. Four main themes emerged: potential benefits; challenges; facilitators; and strategies for implementation. Whilst initially unfamiliar with the concept, all interviewees recognized potential benefits for the research itself and those involved, including researchers. PPI was seen to offer opportunities for public empowerment and strengthening of relationships and understanding between the public, academics and health professionals, resulting in more impactful research. Challenges included a Singaporean culture of passive citizenship and an education system that inculcates deferential attitudes. Facilitators comprised demographic and cultural changes, including trends towards greater individual openness and community engagement. Implementation strategies included formal government policies promoting involvement and informal community‐based collaborative approaches.

Conclusion

Given the socio‐political framework in Singapore, a community‐based approach has potential to address challenges to PPI and maximize impact. Careful consideration needs to be given to issues of resource and support to enable members of the public to engage in culturally sensitive and meaningful ways that will deliver research best placed to effectively address patient needs.

Partnering with patients in healthcare research: a scoping review of ethical issues, challenges, and recommendations for practice

BACKGROUND

Partnering with patients in healthcare research now benefits from a strong rationale and is encouraged by funding agencies and research institutions. However, this new approach raises ethical issues for patients, researchers, research professionals and administrators. The main objective of this review is to map the literature related to the ethical issues associated with patient partnership in healthcare research, as well as the recommendations to address them. Our global aim is to help researchers, patients, research institutions and research ethics boards reflecting on and dealing with these issues.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the ethical issues and recommendations associated with partnering with patients in healthcare research. After our search strategy, 31 peer reviewed articles published between 2007 and 2017 remained and were analyzed.

RESULTS

We have identified 58 first-order ethical issues and challenges associated with patient partnership in research, regrouped in 18 second-order ethical themes. Most of the issues are transversal to all phases and stages of the research process and a lot of them could also apply to patient-partnership in other spheres of health, such as governance, quality improvement, and education. We suggested that ethical issues and challenges of partnered research can be related to four ethical frameworks: 1) Research ethics; 2) Research integrity; 3) Organizational ethics, and 4) Relational ethics.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified numerous ethical issues associated with the recent approach of patient-partnership in research. These issues are more diverse than the issues associated with a more traditional research approach. Indeed, the current discussion on how we address ethical issues in research is anchored in the assumption that patients, as research participants, must be protected from risk. However, doing research with, and not on, the patient involves changes in the way we reflect on the ethical issues associated with this approach to research. We propose to broaden the ethical discussion on partnered research to not only rely on a research ethics framework, but to also frame it within the areas of research integrity, organizational ethics and relational ethics.

Patient and public involvement facilitators: Could they be the key to the NHS quality improvement agenda?

OBJECTIVE

Research into patient and public involvement (PPI) has not examined in detail patient and public involvement facilitators' (PPIFs) roles and activities. This study analysed PPIFs' roles using qualitative data gathered from three different UK health-care organizations.

DESIGN

Thematic analysis was used to examine cross-sectional data collected using a mixed-methods approach from three organizations: a mental health trust, a community health social enterprise and an acute hospital trust. The data set comprised of 27 interviews and 48 observations.

FINDINGS

Patient and public involvement facilitators roles included the leadership and management of PPI interventions, developing health-care practices and influencing quality improvements (QI). They usually occupied middle-management grades but their PPIF role involved working in isolation or in small teams. They reported facilitating the development and maintenance of relationships between patients and the public, and health-care professionals and service managers. These roles sometimes required them to use conflict resolution skills and involved considerable emotional labour. Integrating information from PPI into service improvement processes was reported to be a challenge for these individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and public involvement facilitators capture and hold information that can be used in service improvement. However, they work with limited resources and support. Health-care organizations need to offer more practical support to PPIFs in their efforts to improve care quality, particularly by making their role integral to developing QI strategies.

Perceptions of people with respiratory problems on physician performance evaluation-A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing calls for patient and public involvement in health-care quality improvement, the question of how patient evaluations can contribute to physician learning and performance assessment has received scant attention.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore, amid calls for patient involvement in quality assurance, patients' perspectives on their role in the evaluation of physician performance and to support physicians' learning and decision making on professional competence.

DESIGN

A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study took place in a secondary care setting in the Netherlands. The authors selected 25 patients from two Dutch hospitals and through the Dutch Lung Foundation, using purposive sampling.

METHODS

Data were analysed according to the principles of template analysis, based on an a priori coding framework developed from the literature about patient empowerment, feedback and performance assessment.

RESULTS

The analysis unearthed three predominant patient perspectives: the proactive perspective, the restrained perspective and the outsider perspective. These perspectives differed in terms of perceived power dynamics within the doctor-patient relationship, patients' perceived ability, and willingness to provide feedback and evaluate their physician's performance. Patients' perspectives thus affected the role patients envisaged for themselves in evaluating physician performance.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Although not all patients are equally suitable or willing to be involved, patients can play a role in evaluating physician performance and continuing training through formative approaches. To involve patients successfully, it is imperative to distinguish between different patient perspectives and empower patients by ensuring a safe environment for feedback.

Service user's actual involvement in mental health research practices: A scoping review

Service user involvement in mental health research is on the international political agenda, for example mirrored by an emphasis on user involvement in funding of research. The idea is that service users contribute with their lived experiences of mental distress to the research process and thereby heighten the quality and relevance of the research. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and evaluate empirical research of how mental health service users actually partake in collaborative research processes and to summarize this research in dialogue with mental health user-researchers. The review included 32 studies. Main findings indicated that actual involvement of service user-researchers in research processes encompassed a complex set of precarious negotiation practices, where academics and service user-researchers were positioned and positioned themselves in alternative ways. The review accounts for how mental health service users were involved in collaborative research processes. The extracted themes concerned: (i) Expectations of research processes, (ii) Contribution to research processes, and (iii) Training and learning from research processes. The study reveals that collaborative research in mental health requires changes to traditional research practices to create and support genuine collaborative partnerships and thereby avoid tokenism and power inequalities.

Acceptability of Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures for Hepatitis C Treatment Among People Who Use Drugs

BACKGROUND

Growing international interest in mechanisms to capture and measure experiences and outcomes of health interventions from the patient perspective has led to the development of patient-reported measures (PRMs) across many areas of medicine. Although PRMs are now well utilised in some settings, the rapidly expanding area of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatments for hepatitis C has received remarkably little attention. In addition, questions are also being raised about the extent to which patients have been involved in the development of PRMs, which are primarily designed to reflect the patient perspective. In this context, the aim of this paper was to explore the possibility of developing a new PRM for use in hepatitis C DAA therapy that would also be acceptable to the patient group, in this case people who inject drugs (PWID).

METHOD

The study was based on a participatory design that included a peer researcher and foundational qualitative research including semi-structured interviews with 24 PWID with hepatitis C to inform the development of the PRMs. Stage 2 included four focus groups of six PWID with hepatitis C, who were asked to complete the draft measures and provide feedback.

RESULTS

Participants responded positively to the draft PRMs. The results indicate that participants' concerns during DAA treatment are often not sufficiently attended to in clinical settings. In the light of this finding, participants reported that PRMs have a positive role to play in the negotiation of patients' care during DAA treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings show that utilising a participatory approach to the development of PRMs for DAA HCV treatment with PWID not only provides a way to measure experiences and outcomes of treatment from the patient perspective, but also provides a means for highly marginalised patient groups to have a say in and negotiate their care in ways that might not otherwise be possible.

How to involve children and young people in what is, after all, their research

Third in a series of four articles addressing ethical approaches and issues in undertaking clinical research with children and young people.

A hidden activism and its changing contemporary forms: Mental health service users / survivors mobilising

This commentary concerns how the organisation of State welfare benefits in the UK have changed over the last 20 years, arguing that this has had harmful, even fatal, consequences for people with disabilities and particularly those with mental distress of psychosocial disabilities. This current situation may be called that of austerity. The paper describes how a ‘hidden activism’ has emerged to contest this situation and explains why it is, and to a degree, must be hidden. I then focus on the discourse of responsibilisation where every citizen must take responsibility for embodying the virtues of the good, working person. To ensure this, unemployment has been framed as a psychological problem and psychologists are now employed to ‘treat’ this problem in order that everybody might enter the world of work. I argue that in current conditions this is not possible for all with mental distress. Engaging then with community psychology, I address the issue of allies and how the absence of attention to mental distress might be remedied by this form of work. I draw on the emerging field of user / survivor-led research in mental health and argue that collaboration with community psychology will not be without problems.

Patient Perspectives on the Challenges and Responsibilities of Living With Chronic Inflammatory Diseases: Qualitative Study

Background

Collectively, chronic inflammatory diseases take a great toll on individuals and society in terms of participation restrictions, quality of life, and economic costs. Although prior qualitative studies have reported patients’ experiences and challenges living with specific diseases, few have compared the consequences of disease management in daily life across different types of inflammatory diseases in studies led by patient partners.

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify the significant consequences of inflammatory arthritis, psoriasis, and inflammatory bowel diseases on daily life and explore commonalities across diseases.

Methods

A cross-sectional Web-based survey was designed by patient research partners and distributed by patient awareness organizations via their social media channels and by sharing a link in a newspaper story. One open-ended item asked about burdens and responsibilities experienced in daily life. Informed by narrative traditions in qualitative health research, we applied a thematic content analysis to participants’ written accounts in response to this item. This is an example of a study conceived, conducted, and interpreted with patients as research partners.

Results

A total of 636 Canadians, with a median age band of 55-64 years, submitted surveys, and 80% of the respondents were women. Moreover, 540 participants provided written substantive responses to the open-ended item. Overall, 4 main narratives were generated: (1) daily life disrupted; (2) socioeconomic vulnerabilities; (3) stresses around visible, invisible, and hiding disabilities; and (4) actions aimed at staying positive. Ways in which participants experienced social stigma, pain and fatigue, balancing responsibilities, and worries about the future appeared throughout all 4 narratives.

Conclusions

People living with chronic inflammatory diseases affecting joints, skin, and the digestive tract report important gaps between health, social, and economic support systems that create barriers to finding the services they need to sustain their health. Regardless of diagnosis, they report similar experiences navigating the consequences of lifelong conditions, which have implications for policy makers. There is a need for outcome measures in research and service delivery to address patient priorities and for programs to fill gaps created by the artificial administrative separation of health services, social services, and income assistance.

Beyond cure: patient reported outcomes of hepatitis C treatment among people who inject drugs in Australia

Background

Recent advances in the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection provide the possibility of eliminating HCV as a public health threat. This focus on HCV elimination through treatment, however, is also driving a concomitant focus on ‘achieving cure’ as the primary outcome of treatment. The aim of this paper is to explore what people who inject drugs consider to be important in relation to outcomes of HCV treatment, and whether there are outcomes ‘beyond cure’ that might be important to understand as part of improving engagement in treatment.

Methods

A peer researcher with experience of both HCV treatment and injecting drug use conducted interviews with 24 people in the following groups in Melbourne, Australia: (1) people who had refused or deferred HCV treatment; (2) people who were actively thinking about, planning and/or about to commence HCV treatment; (3) people currently undertaking HCV treatment and (4) people who had recently completed HCV treatment.

Results

The findings show that people who inject drugs are seeking outcomes ‘beyond cure’ including improved physical and mental health, positive changes in identity and social relationships and managing future health and risk. Participants indicated that these other outcomes had not been addressed within their experience of HCV treatment.

Conclusion

While cure is an obvious outcome of HCV treatment, patients are seeking change in other areas of their lives. This study also provides valuable insights for the development of patient-reported measures in this context, which would be an important step towards more patient-centred approaches to HCV treatment.

Patient involvement in qualitative data analysis in a trial of a patient-centred intervention: Reconciling lay knowledge and scientific method

BACKGROUND

We conducted a pilot study of an intervention to facilitate patients' agenda setting in clinical consultations. The primary aim of the study was to test the feasibility of running the randomized controlled trial. A secondary objective was to assess the extent to which patient and public involvement (PPI) could contribute to the process of qualitative data analysis (QDA).

AIMS

To describe a novel approach to including patient partners in QDA; to illustrate the kinds of contribution that patient partners made to QDA in this context; and to propose a characterization of a process by which patient involvement can contribute to knowledge production.

METHODS

Six patient and public representatives were supported to contribute to data analysis via a range of modalities. During a series of QDA workshops, experienced research staff role-played consultations and interviews, and provided vignettes. Workshop data and PPI diaries were analysed using thematic discourse analysis.

RESULTS

We characterized a process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. This PPI group contributed to the rigour and validity of the study findings by challenging their own and the researchers' assumptions, and by testing the emerging hypotheses. By training PPI representatives to undertake qualitative data analysis, we transformed our understanding of doctor-patient consultations.

CONCLUSIONS

This research required changes to our usual research practices but was in keeping with the objective of establishing meaningful patient involvement for a future definitive trial. This work was informed by concepts of critical humility, and a process of knowledge production enabled via the construction of a knowledge space.

Developing a patient-reported experience questionnaire with and for people who use drugs: A community engagement process in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside

People who use drugs (PWUD) frequently have complex health care needs, yet face multiple barriers to accessing services. Involving PWUD in health service design and evaluation can enhance the quality of data collected and ensure policy and practice improvements reflect the expressed needs of the population. However, PWUD remain largely excluded from the evaluation of health services that directly affect their lives, including development of patient-reported experience measures (PREMS) that have gained prominence in health services research and clinical practice. Detailed descriptions of PWUD participation in survey design are notably absent in the literature. In this commentary, we present a case that demonstrates how PWUD can contribute meaningfully to the development of questionnaires that assess patient-reported health care experiences. We describe the development, implementation and outcomes of a process to engage local drug user organizations in the evaluation of a redesign and reorientation of health service delivery in the Downtown Eastside (DTES) neighborhood of Vancouver, Canada. Through this process, participants contributed critical elements to the design of a patient-reported experience measure, including: (1) identifying unmet service needs in the neighborhood; (2) identifying local barriers and facilitators to care; (3) formulating questions on cultural safety; and (4) improving structure, language and clarity of the questionnaire. We highlight lessons learned from the process, reflecting on the strengths, challenges and ethical considerations associated with community-based approaches to questionnaire development. The workshop model presented here illustrates one flexible and promising approach to enabling meaningful participation of PWUD in questionnaire development.

"This is not a Life Anyone would want"-A Qualitative Study of Norwegian ACT Service users' Experience with Mental Health Treatment

We discuss Norwegian service users' experiences with community mental health treatment in general, and the interprofessional Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model in particular. To gain the right to treatment, service users have to accept certain limitations, such as medication and community treatment orders (CTOs). Seventy participants responded to five open-ended questions. In addition, eight of them participated in either focus group or interviews. A collaborative approach, using Stepwise-Deductive Induction (SDI) method was used to analyze the participants' experiences. The results showed that the treatment contributes to an experience of autonomy but also one of restriction. It provides service users with enhanced normalcy, but simultaneously a feeling of deviance. There needs to be an ongoing reflection and discussion about those paradoxes in treatment, and service users have to be involved.

Healthy publics: enabling cultures and environments for health

Despite extraordinary advances in biomedicine and associated gains in human health and well-being, a growing number of health and well-being related challenges have remained or emerged in recent years. These challenges are often 'more than biomedical' in complexion, being social, cultural and environmental in terms of their key drivers and determinants, and underline the necessity of a concerted policy focus on generating healthy societies. Despite the apparent agreement on this diagnosis, the means to produce change are seldom clear, even when the turn to health and well-being requires sizable shifts in our understandings of public health and research practices. This paper sets out a platform from which research approaches, methods and translational pathways for enabling health and well-being can be built. The term 'healthy publics' allows us to shift the focus of public health away from 'the public' or individuals as targets for intervention, and away from the view that culture acts as a barrier to efficient biomedical intervention, towards a greater recognition of the public struggles that are involved in raising health issues, questioning what counts as healthy and unhealthy and assembling the evidence and experience to change practices and outcomes. Creating the conditions for health and well-being, we argue, requires an engaged research process in which public experiments in building and repairing social and material relations are staged and sustained even if, and especially when, the fates of those publics remain fragile and buffeted by competing and often more powerful public formations.

How embedded is public involvement in mainstream health research in England a decade after policy implementation? A realist evaluation

Objectives To explore how embedded patient and public involvement is within mainstream health research following two decades of policy-driven work to underpin health research with patient and public involvement in England. Methods Realist evaluation using Normalization Process Theory as a programme theory to understand what enabled patient and public involvement to be embedded as normal practice. Data were collected through a national scoping and survey, and qualitative methods to track patient and public involvement processes and impact over time within 22 nationally funded research projects. Results In research studies that were able to create reciprocal working relationships and to embed patient and public involvement this was contingent on: the purpose of patient and public involvement being clear; public contributors reflecting research end-beneficiaries; researchers understanding the value of patient and public involvement; patient and public involvement opportunities being provided throughout the research and ongoing evaluation of patient and public involvement. Key contested areas included: whether to measure patient and public involvement impact; seeking public contributors to maintain a balance between being research-aware and an outsider standpoint seen as 'authentically' lay; scaling-up patient and public involvement embedded within a research infrastructure rather than risk token presence and whether patient and public involvement can have a place within basic science. Conclusions While patient and public involvement can be well-integrated within all types of research, policy makers should take account of tensions that must be navigated in balancing moral and methodological imperatives.

Evaluating capacity-building for mental health system strengthening in low- and middle-income countries for service users and caregivers, service planners and researchers

Efforts to support the scale-up of integrated mental health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) need to focus on building human resource capacity in health system strengthening, as well as in the direct provision of mental health care. In a companion editorial, we describe a range of capacity-building activities that are being implemented by a multi-country research consortium (Emerald: Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries) for (1) service users and caregivers, (2) service planners and policy-makers and (3) researchers in six LMICs (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda). In this paper, we focus on the methodology being used to evaluate the impact of capacity-building in these three target groups. We first review the evidence base for approaches to evaluation of capacity-building, highlighting the gaps in this area. We then describe the adaptation of best practice for the Emerald capacity-building evaluation. The resulting mixed method evaluation framework was tailored to each target group and to each country context. We identified a need to expand the evidence base on indicators of successful capacity-building across the different target groups. To address this, we developed an evaluation plan to measure the adequacy and usefulness of quantitative capacity-building indicators when compared with qualitative evaluation. We argue that evaluation needs to be an integral part of capacity-building activities and that expertise needs to be built in methods of evaluation. The Emerald evaluation provides a potential model for capacity-building evaluation across key stakeholder groups and promises to extend understanding of useful indicators of success.

Recovery concept in a Norwegian setting to be examined by the assertive community treatment model and mixed methods

Recovery is a crucial concept in the mental health field. The research of recovery is split into the categories of personal, social and clinical recovery. The purpose of this study was to explore the fragmented concept of recovery in light of assertive community treatment (ACT) in Norway. The study has a mixed methods design with a pragmatic approach. The Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery and open-ended questions posed to 70 participants from 12 ACT teams in Norway, gathered by the "Users interview users" method, are combined with interviews or focus groups with eight of these participants. Surprisingly those under a community treatment order (CTO) report the highest degree of personal recovery. The qualitative material shows that the service users interpreted the concept of recovery differently than researchers and professionals. The ACT service users highlighted three important elements: flexible treatment, medication and access to a car. They emphasized the necessity for basic needs to be met in order to experience a meaningful recovery process, and these basic needs may be of even greater importance to those under CTOs. Their experiences should imply a greater emphasis on securing basic needs such as secure housing, sounder finances and access to the normal benefits offered by society.

Perceptions of the uses of routine general practice data beyond individual care in England: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how different lay and professional groups perceive and understand the use of routinely collected general practice patient data for research, public health, service evaluation and commissioning.

DESIGN, METHOD, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

We conducted a multimethod, qualitative study. This entailed participant observation of the design and delivery of a series of deliberative engagement events about a local patient database made of routine primary care data. We also completed semistructured interviews with key professionals involved in the database. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. The research took place in an inner city borough in England.

RESULTS

Of the community groups who participated in the six engagement events (111 individual citizens), five were health focused. It was difficult to recruit other types of organisations. Participants supported the uses of the database, but it was unclear how well they understood its scope and purpose. They had concerns about transparency, security and the potential misuse of data. Overall, they were more focused on the need for immediate investment in primary care capacity than data infrastructures to improve future health. The 10 interviewed professionals identified the purpose of the database in different ways, according to their interests. They emphasised the promise of the database as a resource in health research in its own right and in linking it to other datasets.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrate positivity to the uses of this local database, but a disconnect between the long-term purposes of the database and participants' short-term priorities for healthcare quality. Varying understandings of the database and the potential for it to be used in multiple different ways in the future cement a need for systematic and routine public engagement to develop and maintain public awareness. Problems recruiting community groups signal a need to consider how we engage wider audiences more effectively.

Reflections and experiences of a co-researcher involved in a renal research study

BACKGROUND

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) is seen as a prerequisite for health research. However, current Patient and public involvement literature has noted a paucity of recording of patient and public involvement within research studies. There have been calls for more recordings and reflections, specifically on impact. Renal medicine has also had similar criticisms and any reflections on patient and public involvement has usually been from the viewpoint of the researcher. Roles of patient and public involvement can vary greatly from sitting on an Advisory Group to analysing data. Different PPI roles have been described within studies; one being a co-researcher. However, the role of the co-researcher is largely undefined and appears to vary from study to study.

METHODS

The aims of this paper are to share one first time co-researcher's reflections on the impact of PPI within a mixed methods (non-clinical trial) renal research study. A retrospective, reflective approach was taken using data available to the co-researcher as part of the day-to-day research activity. Electronic correspondence and documents such as meeting notes, minutes, interview thematic analysis and comments on documents were re-examined. The co-researcher led on writing this paper.

RESULTS

This paper offers a broad definition of the role of the co-researcher. The co-researcher reflects on undertaking and leading on the thematic analysis of interview transcripts, something she had not previously done before. The co-researcher identified a number of key themes; the differences in time and responsibility between being a co-researcher and an Advisory Group member; how the role evolved and involvement activities could match the co-researchers strengths (and the need for flexibility); the need for training and support and lastly, the time commitment. It was also noted that it is preferable that a co-researcher needs to be involved from the very beginning of the grant application.

CONCLUSIONS

The reflections, voices and views of those undertaking PPI has been largely under-represented in the literature. The role of co-researcher was seen to be rewarding but demanding, requiring a large time commitment. It is hoped that the learning from sharing this experience will encourage others to undertake this role, and encourage researchers to reflect on the needs of those involved.

Involving the public in mental health and learning disability research: Can we, should we, do we?

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: UK health policy is clear that researchers should involve the public throughout the research process. The public, including patients, carers and/or local citizens can bring a different and valuable perspective to the research process and improve the quality of research undertaken. Conducting health research is demanding with tight deadlines and scarce resources. This can make involving the public in research very challenging. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: This is the first time the attitudes of researchers working in mental health and learning disability services towards PPI have been investigated. The principles of service user involvement in mental health and learning disability services may support PPI in research as a tool of collaboration and empowerment. This article extends our understanding of the cultural and attitudinal barriers to implementing PPI guidelines in mental health and learning disability services. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Researchers in mental health and learning disability services need to champion, share and publish effective involvement work. Structural barriers to PPI work should be addressed locally and successful strategies shared nationally and internationally. Where PPI guidelines are being developed, attention needs to be paid to cultural factors in the research community to win "hearts and minds" and support the effective integration of PPI across the whole research process.

ABSTRACT

Introduction Patient and public involvement (PPI) is integral to UK health research guidance; however, implementation is inconsistent. There is little research into the attitudes of NHS health researchers towards PPI. Aim This study explored the attitude of researchers working in mental health and learning disability services in the UK towards PPI in health research. Method Using a qualitative methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of eight researchers. A framework approach was used in the analysis to generate themes and core concepts. Results Participants valued the perspective PPI could bring to research, but frustration with tokenistic approaches to involvement work was also evident. Some cultural and attitudinal barriers to integrating PPI across the whole research process were identified. Discussion Despite clear guidelines and established service user involvement, challenges still exist in the integration of PPI in mental health and learning disability research in the UK. Implications for practice Guidelines on PPI may not be enough to prompt changes in research practice. Leaders and researchers need to support attitudinal and cultural changes where required, to ensure the full potential of PPI in mental health and learning disability services research is realized. Relevance statement Findings suggest that despite clear guidelines and a history of service user involvement, there are still challenges to the integration of PPI in mental health and learning disability research in the UK. For countries where PPI guidelines are being developed, attention needs to be paid to cultural factors in the research community to win "hearts and minds" and support the effective integration of PPI across the whole research process.

Managing the transition (ManTra): a resource for persons with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis and their health professionals: protocol for a mixed-methods study in Italy

INTRODUCTION

15 years after clinical onset, about 50% of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis convert to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Notwithstanding the importance of this transition, knowledge of the experiences and needs of patients and carers is fragmentary, and targeted interventions are not available. Managing the Transition to SPMS (ManTra) is a mixed methodology project to develop and test a user-led resource for newly diagnosed patients with SPMS. Here, we describe the developmental phase, consisting of a literature review and a new research study involving key stakeholders, in which we construct the resource.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Round 1: The literature review and study will be conducted in parallel. The latter will identify patient needs using a qualitative approach consisting of: personal semistructured interviews with >15 recently diagnosed patients with SPMS; three focus group meetings (one with significant others of patients, one with neurologists and one with other health professionals caring for patients with SPMS). An online survey (>200 recently diagnosed Italian patients with SPMS) will follow to verify needs in a larger independent sample. An expert panel will outline a set of candidate resources/interventions that aim to satisfy the needs thus identified. Round 2: Consensus on the final resource will be obtained in a 1-day meeting of recently diagnosed patients with SPMS, significant others, health professionals and other stakeholders, using the nominal group technique. The expert panel will refine the resource, identify the outcome measures to assess its efficacy and ascertain the most suitable comparator (ManTra Phase 2, not part of this protocol).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was approved by the ethics committees of each of the involved centres: Foundation IRCCS Neurological Institute C Besta, Milan ; G D'Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara and the Aldo Moro University of Bari. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and a lay summary sent to participants.

The impact of involvement on researchers: a learning experience

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

The impacts of involvement in research are often described in terms of the difference made to the research, the people involved and less frequently the researchers. This paper focuses on the researchers' experiences of involvement, based on an evaluation of a pilot project supporting patient/carer involvement in research at Parkinson's UK. Telephone interviews were conducted with researchers from eight different research projects with involvement. The researchers reported gaining new knowledge from patients and carers. They used this knowledge to change their project designs, interventions and new devices. They also gained new skills in communicating with the public. Meeting patients for the first time had a profound impact on some researchers, causing a change in their professional values. Face-to-face contact seemed particularly important to gain a sense of the 'people behind the data', which suggests such meetings may result in impacts beyond those typically achieved through an exchange of documents. Involvement also influenced one researcher's choices and preferences, in terms of who to ask to take part in their study In summary, researchers often learn something new from talking to patients and carers. Facilitating this conversation seems important to maximise the impact of this learning. In future, it might be helpful for evaluations of involvement to ask researchers in more detail about what they learnt from patients/carers and how they applied their new skills and knowledge. This may help to understand how involvement can influence researchers' thinking to have an impact on research.

ABSTRACT

Background The impacts of patient/public involvement are often described in terms of the difference made to the research, the researchers and the people involved. Involvement often impacts on research by influencing the design, delivery and dissemination. Patients/the public report gaining new skills and knowledge, increased self-confidence, and satisfaction from making a difference. There are fewer reports of the impacts on researchers. This paper discusses the findings from an evaluation of a pilot project supporting patient/carer involvement in research at Parkinson's UK, focusing on the researchers' experiences. Methods Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with one researcher from each of the eight research projects which involved patients/carers in the pilot. The findings were analysed using theoretical thematic analysis. Results and discussion Learning can be described as acquiring new knowledge, behaviours, skills, values, or preferences. The researchers' reports reflected these different types of learning. They reported gaining new knowledge from patients and carers, which they recognised as distinct from their textbook knowledge of the condition. They used this learning to change their project designs and their new interventions and devices. They also gained new skills in communicating with patients and carers about the aims and significance of their research. Meeting patients for the first time had a profound impact on some researchers causing them to change their professional values. Face-to-face contact seemed particularly important to gain a sense of the 'people behind the data', which suggests such meetings may result in impacts beyond those typically achieved through an exchange of documents. The involvement also influenced one researchers' priorities and preferences, in terms of what questions to ask and of whom, in their project. Conclusions Researchers learn from an exchange of knowledge with patients/ carers, which influences their plans and actions. This seems to be one way that involvement subsequently has an impact on research. Facilitating this exchange seems important to support mutual learning and to enhance the impact on researchers. Future evaluations of involvement might benefit from exploring what researchers learnt from patients/carers and how they applied their new skills and knowledge.

What is “the patient perspective” in patient engagement programs? Implicit logics and parallels to feminist theories

Public and patient involvement (PPI) in health care may refer to many different processes, ranging from participating in decision-making about one’s own care to participating in health services research, health policy development, or organizational reforms. Across these many forms of public and patient involvement, the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings remain poorly articulated. Instead, most public and patient involvement programs rely on policy initiatives as their conceptual frameworks. This lack of conceptual clarity participates in dilemmas of program design, implementation, and evaluation. This study contributes to the development of theoretical understandings of public and patient involvement. In particular, we focus on the deployment of patient engagement programs within health service organizations. To develop a deeper understanding of the conceptual underpinnings of these programs, we examined the concept of “the patient perspective” as used by patient engagement practitioners and participants. Specifically, we focused on the way this phrase was used in the singular: “the” patient perspective or “the” patient voice. From qualitative analysis of interviews with 20 patient advisers and 6 staff members within a large urban health network in Canada, we argue that “the patient perspective” is referred to as a particular kind of situated knowledge, specifically an embodied knowledge of vulnerability. We draw parallels between this logic of patient perspective and the logic of early feminist theory, including the concepts of standpoint theory and strong objectivity. We suggest that champions of patient engagement may learn much from the way feminist theorists have constructed their arguments and addressed critique.