1
|
Kawka M, Lucas A, Riad AM, Hawkins D, de Madaria E, West H, Jakaityte I, Lee MJ, Kouli O, Ruanne R, Gujjuri RR, Brown S, Cambridge WA, Pandanaboyana S, Kamarajah SK, McLean KA. Quality of life instruments in acute and chronic pancreatitis: a consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) approach. HPB (Oxford) 2024; 26:859-872. [PMID: 38735815 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2023] [Revised: 04/07/2024] [Accepted: 04/18/2024] [Indexed: 05/14/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatitis is a common surgical emergency, associated with pain and poor quality of life for patients. However, assessment of patient-reported outcome measures in these patients is unclear. This study aimed to identify and evaluate the methodological quality of the health-related quality of life instruments used for patients with acute or chronic pancreatitis. METHODS Prospective studies that evaluated health-related quality of life in acute or chronic pancreatitis were identified from systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science until 28th June 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42021274743). Instrument characteristics were extracted, and methodological quality assessed using COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) guidelines and GRADE approach. Narrative synthesis was conducted, with recommendations for use based on COSMIN criteria, evaluated according to World Health Organisation (WHO) quality of life domains. RESULTS From 3850 records screened, 41 quality of life instruments were identified across 138 studies included. The majority (69.8%, n = 26) were designed to assess general health-related quality of life, whereas the remainder were abdominal-specific (n = 5) or pancreas-specific (n = 10). Only ten instruments (24.3%) demonstrated sufficient content validity, incorporating items in ≥5 WHO quality of life domains. However, only nine instruments (21.9%) incorporated public and patient involvement. Only the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index and PAN-PROMISE met the criteria to be recommended for use based on COSMIN methodological assessment. CONCLUSION There is significant heterogeneity in instruments used to assess quality of life after pancreatitis, with almost all instruments considered insufficient. Robust, validated, and relevant instruments are needed to better understand and determine appropriate interventions to improve quality of life for these patients.
Collapse
|
2
|
Morel T, Schroeder K, Cleanthous S, Andrejack J, Blavat G, Brooks W, Gosden L, Siu C, Ratcliffe N, Slagle AF. The value of co-creating a clinical outcome assessment strategy for clinical trial research: process and lessons learnt. RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2023; 9:98. [PMID: 37876009 PMCID: PMC10598985 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-023-00505-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 10/02/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In support of UCB pharmaceutical research programs, the aim of this research was to implement a novel process for patient involvement in a multidisciplinary research group to co-create a clinical outcome assessment strategy to accurately reflect the experience of people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were an integral part of the decision-making process for patient-reported outcome (PRO) research and instrument development. METHODS In partnership with two patient organizations (Parkinson's UK and the Parkinson's Foundation), 6 patient experts were recruited into a multidisciplinary research group alongside clinical, patient engagement and involvement, regulatory science, and outcome measurement experts. The group was involved across two phases of research; the first phase identified what symptoms are cardinal to the experience of living with early-stage Parkinson's and the second phase involved the development of PRO instruments to better assess the symptoms that are important to people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were important in performing a variety of roles, in particular, qualitative study protocol design, conceptual model development, and subsequent co-creation of two PRO instruments. RESULTS Involving people with Parkinson's in PRO research ensured that the expertise of these representatives from the Parkinson's community shaped and drove the research; as such, PRO instruments were being developed with the patient at the forefront. Working with patient experts required considerable resource and time allocation for planning, communication, document development, and organizing meetings; however, their input enriched the development of PRO instruments and was vital in developing PRO instruments that are more meaningful for people with Parkinson's and clinicians. CONCLUSIONS Conducting PRO research, in the context of clinical development involving pharmaceutical companies, requires balancing regulatory and scientific rigor with tight time constraints. Incorporating a multi-stakeholder perspective, which included patient experts as joint investigators, had a strong positive impact on our research, despite the logistical complexities of their involvement. Due to the input of patient experts, the innovative clinical outcome assessment strategy and the co-created novel PRO instruments were more relevant and holistic to the patient experience of early-stage Parkinson's.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Morel
- Patient-Centred Outcomes Research, UCB Pharma, Allée de La Recherche 60, 1070, Anderlecht, Brussels, Belgium.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Karlsson AW, Kragh-Sørensen A, Børgesen K, Behrens KE, Andersen T, Kidholm ML, Rothmann MJ, Ketelaar M, Janssens A. Roles, outcomes, and enablers within research partnerships: A rapid review of the literature on patient and public involvement and engagement in health research. RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2023; 9:43. [PMID: 37322525 PMCID: PMC10268359 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-023-00448-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2023] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent studies mention a need to investigate partnership roles and dynamics within patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health research, and how impact and outcomes are achieved. Many labels exist to describe involvement processes, but it is unknown whether the label has implications on partnerships and outcomes. This rapid review investigates how roles between patients, relatives and researchers in a broad variety of PPIE activities in health research are described in peer reviewed papers and explores what enables these partnerships. METHODS Rapid review of articles published between 2012 and February 2022 describing, evaluating, or reflecting on experiences of PPIE in health research. All research disciplines and research areas were eligible. Four databases (Medline, Embase, PsychInfo and CINAHL) were searched between November 2021 and February 2022. We followed PRISMA guidelines and extracted descriptive factors: year, origin, research area and discipline, study focus, framework used and co-authorship. On a selection of articles, we performed a narrative analysis of partnership roles using Smits et al.'s. Involvement Matrix. Lastly, we performed a meta synthesis of reported enablers and outcomes of the partnerships. Patients and Relatives (PRs) have been involved in the whole rapid review process and are co-authors of this article. RESULTS Seventy articles from various research disciplines and areas were included. Forty articles were selected for a narrative analysis of the role description of PRs and researchers, and a meta synthesis of enablers and outcomes. Most articles described researchers as decision-makers throughout the research cycle. PRs most often were partners when they were included as co-authors; they were mostly partners in the design, analysis, write-up, and dissemination stages. Enablers of partnerships included: PR training, personality of PRs and communication skills, trust, remuneration and time. CONCLUSIONS Researchers' decision-making roles gives them control of where and when to include PRs in their projects. Co-authorship is a way of acknowledging patients' contributions which may lead to legitimation of their knowledge and the partnership. Authors describe common enablers, which can help future partnership formation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Wettergren Karlsson
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Anne Kragh-Sørensen
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Kirsten Børgesen
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Karsten Erik Behrens
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Torben Andersen
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Maiken Langhoff Kidholm
- Department of Public Health, User Perspectives and Community-Based Interventions, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Mette Juel Rothmann
- Steno Diabetes Center Odense, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Center for Innovative Medical Innovation, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Marjolijn Ketelaar
- Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, De Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Astrid Janssens
- Bioethics and Health Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Centre for Research with Patients and Relatives, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Vanstone M, Canfield C, Evans C, Leslie M, Levasseur MA, MacNeil M, Pahwa M, Panday J, Rowland P, Taneja S, Tripp L, You J, Abelson J. Towards conceptualizing patients as partners in health systems: a systematic review and descriptive synthesis. Health Res Policy Syst 2023; 21:12. [PMID: 36698200 PMCID: PMC9876419 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-022-00954-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the sharp increase in the involvement of patients (including family and informal caregivers) as active participants, collaborators, advisors and decision-makers in health systems, a new role has emerged: the patient partner. The role of patient partner differs from other forms of patient engagement in its longitudinal and bidirectional nature. This systematic review describes extant work on how patient partners are conceptualized and engaged in health systems. In doing so, it furthers the understanding of the role and activities of patient partners, and best practices for future patient partnership activities. METHODS A systematic review was conducted of peer-reviewed literature published in English or French that describes patient partner roles between 2000 and 2021 in any country or sector of the health system. We used a broad search strategy to capture descriptions of longitudinal patient engagement that may not have used words such as "partner" or "advisor". RESULTS A total of 506 eligible papers were identified, representing patient partnership activities in mostly high-income countries. These studies overwhelmingly described patient partnership in health research. We identified clusters of literature about patient partnership in cancer and mental health. The literature is saturated with single-site descriptive studies of patient partnership on individual projects or initiatives. There is a lack of work synthesizing impacts, facilitating factors and outcomes of patient partnership in healthcare. CONCLUSIONS There is not yet a consolidated understanding of the role, activities or impacts of patient partners. Advancement of the literature has been stymied by a lack of consistently used terminology. The literature is ready to move beyond single-site descriptions, and synthesis of existing pockets of high-quality theoretical work will be essential to this evolution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meredith Vanstone
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada ,grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Carolyn Canfield
- Patient Advisors Network (PAN), Toronto, ON Canada ,grid.17091.3e0000 0001 2288 9830Department of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3 Canada
| | - Cara Evans
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Myles Leslie
- grid.22072.350000 0004 1936 7697School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, 906 8Th Avenue S.W., Calgary, AB T2P1H9 Canada
| | | | - Maggie MacNeil
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Manisha Pahwa
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada ,grid.419887.b0000 0001 0747 0732Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Care Ontario, Ontario Health, 505 University Avenue, Toronto, ON Canada
| | - Janelle Panday
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Paula Rowland
- grid.17063.330000 0001 2157 2938Wilson Centre and Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada 1 King’s College Circle, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8 Canada
| | - Shipra Taneja
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Laura Tripp
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Jeonghwa You
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Health Policy PhD Program, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| | - Julia Abelson
- grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada ,grid.25073.330000 0004 1936 8227Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Granholm Valmari E, Melander M, Hariz GM, Naesström M, Lindström M. Translation and linguistic validation of the Swedish recovering quality of life (ReQoL) - A brief research report. Front Psychiatry 2023; 14:1059406. [PMID: 36824668 PMCID: PMC9941141 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1059406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2022] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023] Open
Abstract
In research and among clinicians, the focus has shifted from mainly symptom reduction and increasing functionality to a more recovery-oriented focus. Although there are instruments measuring recovery, there has been a lack of instruments sensitive enough to measure the quality of life for people with severe mental health disorders. Therefore, this study aimed to obtain a Swedish version of the Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) questionnaire adhering to best practice guidelines using various steps of translation, linguistic validation, and cognitive debriefing. The cognitive debriefing was conducted with seven participants, and all felt the items in the questionnaire were relevant to their health, apprehensible, and easy to complete. However, some issues were raised regarding wording and the concepts behind certain items. All feedback was considered, and some items were revised in response to criticism after continuous discussions. A Swedish version of ReQoL now exists, and although there is a need for ReQoL in different clinical research settings in Sweden, further research is required to psychometrically test the construct validity as well as reliability of the Swedish version in Sweden.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elin Granholm Valmari
- Occupational Therapy Unit, Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Marianne Melander
- Psychiatric Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Gun-Marie Hariz
- Occupational Therapy Unit, Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.,Department of Clinical Science, Neurosciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Matilda Naesström
- Psychiatric Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Maria Lindström
- Occupational Therapy Unit, Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Ryland H, Cook J, Ferris R, Markham S, Sales C, Fitzpatrick R, Fazel S. Development of the FORUM: a new patient and clinician reported outcome measure for forensic mental health services. PSYCHOLOGY, CRIME & LAW : PC & L 2022; 28:865-882. [PMID: 36157331 PMCID: PMC7613634 DOI: 10.1080/1068316x.2021.1962873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2021] [Accepted: 05/28/2021] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Forensic mental health services provide care to people in secure psychiatric hospitals and via specialised community teams. Such services are typically low volume and high cost, often highly restrictive and average duration of inpatient care prior to discharge is long. Measuring outcomes of care is important to safeguard patients and the public, monitor progress, inform treatment plans and assist in service evaluation and planning. We describe the development in England of a new outcome measure for forensic mental health services. Patient interviews and multistakeholder focus groups were held to elicit key concepts. Thematic analysis was used to develop an outcomes framework. Fifteen patients participated in the interviews and 48 stakeholders in the focus groups. Six domains were identified in thematic analysis: 'about me, my quality of life, my health, my safety and risk, my life skills and my progress'. Sixty-two stakeholders participated in the first round of the Delphi process, and 49 completed round two. Eight of the top fifteen outcomes were shared between patients/carers and professionals. Based on these results, a new outcome measure, the FORensic oUtcome Measure (FORUM), was developed including both a patient reported and clinician reported measure. Further assessment of the FORUM's use to track patients' progress over time, and facilitate shared decision-making and care planning, is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Ryland
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jonathan Cook
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Rob Ferris
- James Nash House Forensic Mental Health Service, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Sarah Markham
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Christian Sales
- Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | | | - Seena Fazel
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Hamilton C, Filia K, Lloyd S, Prober S, Duncan E. ‘More than just numbers on a page?’ A qualitative exploration of the use of data collection and feedback in youth mental health services. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0271023. [PMID: 35857762 PMCID: PMC9299353 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives This study aimed to explore current data collection and feedback practice, in the form of monitoring and evaluation, among youth mental health (YMH) services and healthcare commissioners; and to identify barriers and enablers to this practice. Design Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom videoconferencing software. Data collection and analysis were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were deductively coded to the 14 domains of the TDF and inductively coded to generate belief statements. Setting Healthcare commissioning organisations and YMH services in Australia. Participants Twenty staff from healthcare commissioning organisations and twenty staff from YMH services. Results The umbrella behaviour ‘monitoring and evaluation’ (ME) can be sub-divided into 10 specific sub-behaviours (e.g. planning and preparing, providing technical assistance, reviewing and interpreting data) performed by healthcare commissioners and YMH services. One hundred belief statements relating to individual, social, or environmental barriers and enablers were generated. Both participant groups articulated a desire to improve the use of ME for quality improvement and had particular interest in understanding the experiences of young people and families. Identified enablers included services and commissioners working in partnership, data literacy (including the ability to set appropriate performance indicators), relational skills, and provision of meaningful feedback. Barriers included data that did not adequately depict service performance, problems with data processes and tools, and the significant burden that data collection places on YMH services with the limited resources they have to do it. Conclusions Importantly, this study illustrated that the use of ME could be improved. YMH services, healthcare commissioners should collaborate on ME plans and meaningfully involve young people and families where possible. Targets, performance indicators, and outcome measures should explicitly link to YMH service quality improvement; and ME plans should include qualitative data. Streamlined data collection processes will reduce unnecessary burden, and YMH services should have the capability to interrogate their own data and generate reports. Healthcare commissioners should also ensure that they provide meaningful feedback to their commissioned services, and local and national organisations collecting youth mental health data should facilitate the sharing of this data. The results of the study should be used to design theory-informed strategies to improve ME use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kate Filia
- Orygen, Melbourne, Australia
- Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | | | | | - Eilidh Duncan
- Health Services Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
van Ham CR, Burgers VWG, Sleeman SHE, Dickhout A, Harthoorn NCGL, Manten-Horst E, van Eenbergen MC, Husson O. A qualitative study on the involvement of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer during multiple research phases: "plan, structure, and discuss". RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2022; 8:30. [PMID: 35804443 PMCID: PMC9264747 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-022-00362-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/15/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Including the lived experience of patients in research is important to improve the quality and outcomes of cancer studies. It is challenging to include adolescents and young adults (AYAs) cancer patients in studies and this accounts even more for AYAs with an uncertain and/or poor prognosis (UPCP). Little is known about involving these AYAs in scientific research. However, by including their lived experiences during multiple phases of research, the quality of the study improves and therefore also the healthcare and quality of life of this unique patient group. We first aimed to document experiences of AYAs and researchers with AYA involvement initiatives using the Involvement Matrix and the nine phases of the research cycle. Second, we aimed to map the (expected) challenges and recommendations, according to patients and researchers, for AYA involvement in each research phase. METHODS Thirteen semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with AYAs and researchers from February 2020 to May 2020. A thematic analysis codebook with a critical realistic framework was used to analyze the data. RESULTS AYAs and researchers were predominantly positive about AYA involvement within six of the nine phases of research: identify and prioritize topics, develop study design, disseminate information, implement, and evaluate findings. Not all respondents were positive about AYA involvement in the following three phases: formulate research questions, conduct research, and analysis and interpretation. However, few respondents had experience with AYA-researcher collaborations in multiple phases of the research cycle. Last, the results indicate the importance of adding a role (practical support) and two phases (grant application and recruitment) to the Involvement Matrix. CONCLUSION Our results show the added value of AYA (with a UPCP) involvement within scientific research projects. We recommend researchers to actively think about the level and phase of collaboration prior to each research project, by involving and brainstorming with AYAs at the conception and throughout research projects. Besides, to enhance fruitful participation, we suggest thoroughly discussing the pros and cons of collaboration for each phase together with AYAs via the proposed Involvement Matrix to support transparency. We recommend to report experiences, choices, and results of AYA involvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Camila Rosalinde van Ham
- Department of Communication, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vivian Wilhelmina Gerarda Burgers
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Annemiek Dickhout
- Department of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Mies Christina van Eenbergen
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Olga Husson
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Division of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Knowles S, Sharma V, Fortune S, Wadman R, Churchill R, Hetrick S. Adapting a codesign process with young people to prioritize outcomes for a systematic review of interventions to prevent self-harm and suicide. Health Expect 2022; 25:1393-1404. [PMID: 35521681 PMCID: PMC9327872 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13479] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2021] [Revised: 02/18/2022] [Accepted: 02/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Research and clinical outcomes that matter to people with lived experience can significantly differ from those outcomes studied by researchers. To inform a future Cochrane review of suicide and self‐harm prevention interventions, we aimed to work with young people with relevant lived experience to agree on priority outcomes. Design Four participatory codesign workshops were completed across two sites (New Zealand, United Kingdom) with 28 young people in total. We iteratively adapted the methods over the course of the study. Results ‘Improved coping’ and ‘safer/more accepting environment to disclose’ were the final top‐rated outcomes. ‘Reduction of self‐harm’ was considered a low priority as it could be misleading, stigmatizing and was considered a secondary consequence of other improvements. In contrast to typical research outcomes, young people emphasized the diversity of experience, the dynamic nature of improvement and holistic and asset‐based framing. Methodologically, dialogue using design materials (personas) to thematically explore outcomes was effective in overcoming the initial challenge of disparate quantitative ratings. Discussion The results will directly inform the development of a Cochrane review, enabling identification of whether and how outcomes of most importance to young people are measured in trials. Rather than producing discrete measurable outcomes that could be easily added to the systematic review, the young people challenged the academic conceptualization of outcomes, with implications for future evidence synthesis and intervention research, and for future codesign. Patient or Public Contribution Young people with lived experience were codesigners of the outcomes, and their feedback informed iterative changes to the study methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Knowles
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| | - Vartika Sharma
- Department of Psychological Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.,Children and Young People Satellite, Cochrane Common Mental Disorders, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Sarah Fortune
- Department of Social and Community Health, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Ruth Wadman
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Rachel Churchill
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| | - Sarah Hetrick
- Department of Psychological Medicine, School of Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.,Children and Young People Satellite, Cochrane Common Mental Disorders, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Carlton J, Peasgood T, Mukuria C, Johnson J, Ogden M, Tovey W. The role of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) within the development of the EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB). J Patient Rep Outcomes 2022; 6:35. [PMID: 35394269 PMCID: PMC8993969 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-022-00437-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2022] [Accepted: 03/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives The value of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) within the development and refinement of outcome measures is becoming increasingly recognized. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of how PPIE was integrated within the development of a new measure designed for use in economic evaluations across health and social care, the EQ Health and Wellbeing (EQ-HWB™). Methods Four PPIE sessions were held at key stages. Discussions from each session and the outcome of any tasks were shared with the wider research team and used to help inform decision-making. Results and discussion PPIE covered several components of outcome measure development including; review of conceptual model; discussion on sub-domain inclusion; item refinement and reduction; pre-testing of items; selection of items for the measure; and design of the measure. Key learning points for future projects were highlighted including; consideration of practicalities, resources and logistics of PPIE activities; how sessions and activities are managed effectively; and how to managing expectations and communication from both researcher and PPIE perspectives. Conclusions The PPIE group provided invaluable insight into perspectives of future patients and carers. Their input was fed into a number of developmental stages. The formal involvement from the PPIE group meant that the voice of the general public was heard. This helped ensure the appropriateness of the design of the final measure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Carlton
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
| | - Tessa Peasgood
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Clara Mukuria
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - Julie Johnson
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | | | - Wade Tovey
- On Behalf of the EQ-HWB PPIE Group, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lin E, Harris H, Gruszecki S, Costa-Dookhan KA, Rodak T, Sockalingam S, Soklaridis S. Developing an evaluation framework for assessing the impact of recovery colleges: protocol for a participatory stakeholder engagement process and cocreated scoping review. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e055289. [PMID: 35314472 PMCID: PMC8938698 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Recovery colleges (RCs) are mental health centres aimed at equipping people with skills to live a meaningful life despite the presence of mental distress. Unique to them is the aspect of cocreation; RCs are designed collaboratively with people of lived experiences of mental health and addictions and care providers. Despite established benefits, there remains a lack of empirical evidence on how RCs work and on their impact. AIMS We aim to address this gap by designing a cocreated evaluation framework for RCs. This will be accomplished by engaging RC student/facilitators to provide perspectives on RCs/RC evaluation and cocreate a scoping review identifying evaluation gaps in the literature. Themes identified through these processes will form the evaluation framework. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Two methodologies will be used to explore RC evaluation: student/facilitator engagement and a scoping review of current published and grey literature on RC evaluation. Engagement will be achieved using a participatory action research approach consisting of informant interviews of ~25 RC students/facilitators across Canada, which will be thematically analysed. The scoping review will follow methodology described by Arksey and O'Malley modified to support cocreation. Concurrent conducting of the engagement process and scoping review will allow RC students and peer facilitators the opportunity to shape RC evaluations, address gaps in the literature and codesign an evaluation framework focused on recovery-oriented processes and outcomes mattering most to RCs students/facilitators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethics approval was received for the RC student/facilitator engagement component from the Centre for Addictions and Mental Health Research Ethics Board (#042-2020) and Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (#20-013-B). Scoping review results will be copresented through national and international medical education conferences and published in open-access peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, a dissemination strategy on evaluation for the national RC community will be created.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Lin
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Holly Harris
- Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, Whitby, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sam Gruszecki
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kenya A Costa-Dookhan
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Terri Rodak
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sanjeev Sockalingam
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sophie Soklaridis
- Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Lu W, Oursler J, Gao N, Herrick SJ, Mariani J, Socha C, Beninato J. Service needs assessment of employment-related soft skills for transition age youth with disabilities. JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION 2022. [DOI: 10.3233/jvr-211173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Work-related soft skills can be an important factor for successful employment outcomes, particularly for individuals with disabilities. OBJECTIVE: This study conducted a survey on the needs of important work-related soft skills for employment success of transition age youth with disabilities. METHODS: 183 participants included 27 individuals with disabilities, 32 family members of individuals with disabilities,35 disability service providers, 47 disability advocates and 42 employers, completed surveys to identify a list of soft skills by importance for transition age youth with disabilities to succeed at work. RESULTS: All five groups noted the top two skills: asking for help and responding to feedback, as most important. Employers also rated interview skills as third most important skills, while the other four groups advocated requesting for accommodations and negotiating conflicts as the third and fourth most important skills. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicated soft skills being critical to work success for transition age youth with disabilities, with some skills potentially being more important. Vocational counseling implications were discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Weili Lu
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Janice Oursler
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Ni Gao
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Samantha J. Herrick
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Jake Mariani
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Crystal Socha
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - John Beninato
- Department of Psychiatric Rehabilitation and Counseling Professions, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Aguayo GA, Goetzinger C, Scibilia R, Fischer A, Seuring T, Tran VT, Ravaud P, Bereczky T, Huiart L, Fagherazzi G. Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study. J Med Internet Res 2021; 23:e25743. [PMID: 34941554 PMCID: PMC8738987 DOI: 10.2196/25743] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Revised: 01/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/08/2021] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research aims to increase the quality and relevance of research by incorporating the perspective of those ultimately affected by the research. Despite these potential benefits, PPI is rarely included in epidemiology protocols. Objective The aim of this study is to provide an overview of methods used for PPI and offer practical recommendations for its efficient implementation in epidemiological research. Methods We conducted a review on PPI methods. We mirrored it with a patient advocate’s viewpoint about PPI. We then identified key steps to optimize PPI in epidemiological research based on our review and the viewpoint of the patient advocate, taking into account the identification of barriers to, and facilitators of, PPI. From these, we provided practical recommendations to launch a patient-centered cohort study. We used the implementation of a new digital cohort study as an exemplary use case. Results We analyzed data from 97 studies, of which 58 (60%) were performed in the United Kingdom. The most common methods were workshops (47/97, 48%); surveys (33/97, 34%); meetings, events, or conferences (28/97, 29%); focus groups (25/97, 26%); interviews (23/97, 24%); consensus techniques (8/97, 8%); James Lind Alliance consensus technique (7/97, 7%); social media analysis (6/97, 6%); and experience-based co-design (3/97, 3%). The viewpoint of a patient advocate showed a strong interest in participating in research. The most usual PPI modalities were research ideas (60/97, 62%), co-design (42/97, 43%), defining priorities (31/97, 32%), and participation in data analysis (25/97, 26%). We identified 9 general recommendations and 32 key PPI-related steps that can serve as guidelines to increase the relevance of epidemiological studies. Conclusions PPI is a project within a project that contributes to improving knowledge and increasing the relevance of research. PPI methods are mainly used for idea generation. On the basis of our review and case study, we recommend that PPI be included at an early stage and throughout the research cycle and that methods be combined for generation of new ideas. For e-cohorts, the use of digital tools is essential to scale up PPI. We encourage investigators to rely on our practical recommendations to extend PPI in future epidemiological studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gloria A Aguayo
- Deep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Population Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg
| | - Catherine Goetzinger
- Deep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Population Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg
| | - Renza Scibilia
- Diabetes Australia, Melbourne, Australia.,Diabetogenic, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Aurélie Fischer
- Deep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Population Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg
| | - Till Seuring
- Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research, Esch/Alzette, Luxembourg
| | - Viet-Thi Tran
- Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistic Sorbonne Paris Cité, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), Université de Paris, Paris, France.,Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Ravaud
- Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistic Sorbonne Paris Cité, National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), Université de Paris, Paris, France.,Centre d'Epidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Tamás Bereczky
- European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Laetitia Huiart
- Deep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Population Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg
| | - Guy Fagherazzi
- Deep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Population Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Ryland H, Cook J, Fitzpatrick R, Fazel S. Ten outcome measures in forensic mental health: A survey of clinician views on comprehensiveness, ease of use and relevance. CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR AND MENTAL HEALTH : CBMH 2021; 31:372-386. [PMID: 34755402 PMCID: PMC9299034 DOI: 10.1002/cbm.2221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2021] [Accepted: 10/04/2021] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Measurement of outcomes in forensic mental health services is essential to ensure that these services are delivering good quality care and treatment. Instruments for outcome measurement should cover all important domains, be easy to implement in a routine clinical context and facilitate transfer of relevant information between clinicians as the patient progresses along a recovery and rehabilitation pathway. AIMS We sought the views of clinicians on 10 common instruments used as outcome measures in forensic mental health services, especially on their perceived comprehensiveness and ease of use. METHODS An online survey was used to gather the views of clinicians from a range of professional backgrounds working in forensic mental health services in the United Kingdom. The selected instruments were identified from a previous systematic review of instruments for measuring outcomes in this context. Questions covered comprehensiveness, ease of use, patient involvement, relevance and use for progressing tracking and care planning. RESULTS Complete responses were received from 229 individuals. The range of respondents either agreeing or strongly agreeing that individual instruments were comprehensive was 6-39%; easy to use 19%-69%; relevant 31%-78%; useful to measure progress 7-70%; and useful for care planning 33-81%. Respondents reported that, for each of the 10 instruments, full involvement of patients varied between 3% and 22%; partial involvement 12-45%, patients informed, but not involved 11%-28%; and patients not involved or informed 21%-64%. CONCLUSIONS The Health of the Nation Outcome Scale Secure, the only instrument designed as an outcome measure, is not regarded by clinicians as useful in that respect and the majority of clinicians do not inform patients they are using it. Clinicians appear most familiar with the Historical Clinical Risk 20 (HCR-20), which some respondents considered potentially useful as a progress measure but with limited patient involvement. Most respondents did not think that the HCR-20 is comprehensive. There is a need for outcome measures that are comprehensive, easy to use and have adequate patient involvement in their development and rating.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Ryland
- Department of PsychiatryUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
| | - Jonathan Cook
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
| | - Ray Fitzpatrick
- Nuffield Department of Population HealthUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
| | - Seena Fazel
- Department of PsychiatryUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Broomfield K, Craig C, Smith S, Jones G, Judge S, Sage K. Creativity in public involvement: supporting authentic collaboration and inclusive research with seldom heard voices. RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2021; 7:17. [PMID: 33731228 PMCID: PMC7968302 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-021-00260-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2020] [Accepted: 03/08/2021] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of public involvement (PI) in healthcare research is growing in importance and it is imperative that researchers continuously reflect on how to promote the inclusion of patients and service users in the design and delivery of research. PI offers a mechanism for end-users to be involved planning, executing, and reporting research. Some patient groups, including people who have communication difficulties, may struggle to engage in the methods traditionally employed to promote PI engagement such as questionnaires and focus groups. METHODS This article describes a longitudinal case-study of a PI group, consisting of people who have communication difficulties, for a patient-reported outcome development project. Creative methods, informed by the participatory design principles of enacting, seeing and doing, were introduced stepwise into seven PI meetings. Data from video and visual minutes were used to evaluate the impact of the methods, following each group. Feedback, in the form of verbal and visual outputs taken directly from group meeting minutes, along with vignettes evidenced the impact of the methods on the project and group members. RESULTS Creative methods enabled the PI group members to successfully contribute in meetings, to interact dynamically and to engage with the aims and processes of the research project. Their involvement facilitated the development of accessible recruitment materials, informed data analysis and supported the dissemination of project outputs. Employing creative methods also enabled both PI group members and the academic team to reflect on their own roles within the research project and the impact that their active involvement in the PI group has had on their personal development and perspectives on research. CONCLUSION The impact of using creative methods in PI for this patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) development project improved collaboration and understanding between PI members and the academic team. The authentic engagement of people who have communication difficulties in PI generated a more accessible project in terms of both process and impact. Creativity has applicability beyond people whose communication is non-verbal; it should be harnessed by research teams to identify and breakdown barriers to involvement to develop outcome tools that reflect the diversity of our populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine Broomfield
- Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucestershire, UK.
- Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK.
- Bristol Speech and Language Therapy Research Unit, Steps and Pines, Southmead Hospital, Westbury on Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK.
| | | | | | | | - Simon Judge
- Barnsley Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Barnsley, UK
- University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Karen Sage
- Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Keetharuth AD, Rowen D, Bjorner JB, Brazier J. Estimating a Preference-Based Index for Mental Health From the Recovering Quality of Life Measure: Valuation of Recovering Quality of Life Utility Index. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 24:281-290. [PMID: 33518035 PMCID: PMC7871010 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2020] [Revised: 09/04/2020] [Accepted: 10/19/2020] [Indexed: 05/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There are increasing concerns about the appropriateness of generic preference-based measures to capture health benefits in the area of mental health. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study is to estimate preference weights for a new measure, Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL-10), to better capture the benefits of mental healthcare. METHODS Psychometric analyses of a larger sample of mental health service users (n = 4266) using confirmatory factor analyses and item response theory were used to derive a health state classification system and inform the selection of health states for utility assessment. A valuation survey with members of the UK public representative in terms of age, sex, and region was conducted using face-to-face interviewer administered time-trade-off with props. A series of regression models were fitted to the data and the best performing model selected for the scoring algorithm. RESULTS The ReQoL-Utility Index (UI) classification system comprises 6 mental health items and 1 physical health item. Sixty-four health states were valued by 305 participants. The preferred model was a random effects model, with significant and consistent coefficients and best model fit. Estimated utilities modeled for all health states ranged from -0.195 (state worse than dead) to 1 (best possible state). CONCLUSIONS The development of the ReQoL-UI is based on a novel application of item response theory methods for generating the classification system and selecting health states for valuation. Conventional time-trade-off was used to elicit utility values that are modeled to enable the generation of QALYs for use in cost-utility analysis of mental health interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Donna Rowen
- School of Health of Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jakob Bue Bjorner
- Optum Patient Insights, Johnston, RI, USA; University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - John Brazier
- School of Health of Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
den Hollander D, Fiore M, Martin-Broto J, Kasper B, Casado Herraez A, Kulis D, Nixon I, Sodergren SC, Eichler M, van Houdt WJ, Desar IME, Ray-Coquard I, Piccinin C, Kosela-Paterczyk H, Miah A, Hentschel L, Singer S, Wilson R, van der Graaf WTA, Husson O. Incorporating the Patient Voice in Sarcoma Research: How Can We Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in This Heterogeneous Group of Patients? A Study Protocol. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 13:1. [PMID: 33561018 PMCID: PMC7792589 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13010001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Revised: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 12/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Sarcomas comprise 1% of adult tumors and are very heterogeneous. Long-lasting and cumulative treatment side-effects detract from the (progression-free) survival benefit of treatment. Therefore, it is important to assess treatment effectiveness in terms of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as well. However, questionnaires capturing the unique issues of sarcoma patients are currently lacking. Given the heterogeneity of the disease, the development of such an instrument may be challenging. The study aims to (1) develop an exhaustive list of all HRQoL issues relevant to sarcoma patients and determine content validity; (2) determine a strategy for HRQoL measurement in sarcoma patients. We will conduct an international, multicenter, mixed-methods study (registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04071704) among bone or soft tissue sarcoma patients ≥18 years, using EORTC Quality of Life Group questionnaire development guidelines. First, an exhaustive list of HRQoL issues will be generated, derived from literature and patient (n = 154) and healthcare professional (HCP) interviews (n = 30). Subsequently, another group of sarcoma patients (n = 475) and HCPs (n = 30) will be asked to rate and prioritize the issues. Responses will be analyzed by priority, prevalence and range of responses for each item. The outcome will be a framework for tailored HRQoL measurement in sarcoma patients, taking into account sociodemographic and clinical variables.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dide den Hollander
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (D.d.H.); (W.T.A.v.d.G.)
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
| | - Marco Fiore
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy;
| | - Javier Martin-Broto
- Department of Medical Oncology, Virgen del Rocío University Hospital, 41013 Sevilla, Spain;
| | - Bernd Kasper
- Sarcoma Unit, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim University Medical Center, 68167 Mannheim, Germany;
| | | | - Dagmara Kulis
- Quality of Life Department, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; (D.K.); (C.P.)
| | - Ioanna Nixon
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Beatson Cancer Center, Glasgow G12 0YN, UK;
| | | | - Martin Eichler
- University Cancer Center (NCT/UCC), University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany; (M.E.); (L.H.)
| | - Winan J. van Houdt
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Ingrid M. E. Desar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
| | - Isabelle Ray-Coquard
- HESPER Lab, Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Léon-Bérard, University Claude Bernard Lyon, 69008 Lyon, France;
| | - Claire Piccinin
- Quality of Life Department, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; (D.K.); (C.P.)
| | - Hanna Kosela-Paterczyk
- Department of Medical Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, 02-034 Warsaw, Poland;
| | - Aisha Miah
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK;
| | - Leopold Hentschel
- University Cancer Center (NCT/UCC), University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany; (M.E.); (L.H.)
| | - Susanne Singer
- Epidemiology and Informatics, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, University Medical Centre Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany;
- University Cancer Centre Mainz (UCT), University Medical Centre Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany
| | - Roger Wilson
- Sarcoma Patients EuroNet, D-85521 Riemerling, Germany;
| | - Winette T. A. van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (D.d.H.); (W.T.A.v.d.G.)
- Department of Medical Oncology, ErasmusMC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olga Husson
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (D.d.H.); (W.T.A.v.d.G.)
- Division of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, London SM2 5NG, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Keetharuth AD, Bjorner JB, Barkham M, Browne J, Croudace T, Brazier J. An item response theory analysis of an item pool for the recovering quality of life (ReQoL) measure. Qual Life Res 2020; 30:267-276. [PMID: 32909162 PMCID: PMC7847872 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-020-02622-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/20/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Purpose ReQoL-10 and ReQoL-20 have been developed for use as outcome measures with individuals aged 16 and over, experiencing mental health difficulties. This paper reports modelling results from the item response theory (IRT) analyses that were used for item reduction. Methods From several stages of preparatory work including focus groups and a previous psychometric survey, a pool of items was developed. After confirming that the ReQoL item pool was sufficiently unidimensional for scoring, IRT model parameters were estimated using Samejima’s Graded Response Model (GRM). All 39 mental health items were evaluated with respect to item fit and differential item function regarding age, gender, ethnicity, and diagnosis. Scales were evaluated regarding overall measurement precision and known-groups validity (by care setting type and self-rating of overall mental health). Results The study recruited 4266 participants with a wide range of mental health diagnoses from multiple settings. The IRT parameters demonstrated excellent coverage of the latent construct with the centres of item information functions ranging from − 0.98 to 0.21 and with discrimination slope parameters from 1.4 to 3.6. We identified only two poorly fitting items and no evidence of differential item functioning of concern. Scales showed excellent measurement precision and known-groups validity. Conclusion The results from the IRT analyses confirm the robust structure properties and internal construct validity of the ReQoL instruments. The strong psychometric evidence generated guided item selection for the final versions of the ReQoL measures. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-020-02622-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jakob Bue Bjorner
- Optum Patient Insights, Rhode Island, United States and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Michael Barkham
- Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - John Browne
- School of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - Tim Croudace
- School of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | - John Brazier
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Carlton J, Peasgood T, Khan S, Barber R, Bostock J, Keetharuth AD. An emerging framework for fully incorporating public involvement (PI) into patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). J Patient Rep Outcomes 2020; 4:4. [PMID: 31933005 PMCID: PMC6957651 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-019-0172-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 12/23/2019] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used in the United Kingdom (UK) and internationally to report and monitor patients’ subjective assessments of their symptoms and functional status and also their quality of life. Whilst the importance of involving the public in PROM development to increase the quality of the developed PROM has been highlighted this practice is not widespread. There is a lack of guidance on how public involvement (PI) could be embedded in the development of PROMs, where the roles can be more complex than in other types of research. This paper provides a timely review and sets out an emerging framework for fully incorporating PI into PROM development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Carlton
- University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
| | - T Peasgood
- University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - S Khan
- University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - R Barber
- University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - J Bostock
- University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,Kings College London, London, UK
| | - A D Keetharuth
- University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| |
Collapse
|