Dataset Information

Engaging older patients in cardiovascular research: observational analysis of the ICON-1 study.

ABSTRACT: Background: As a consequence of population ageing, the number of older patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is increasing. The historical underrepresentation of older patients in many pivotal ACS clinical trials undermines the practice of evidence-based medicine in this high-risk cohort. This study evaluates the feasibility of recruitment of older patients to a longitudinal, clinical study.

Methods: The study to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in high-risk patieNts with ACS (ICON-1) is an observational, prospective cohort study investigating predictors of poor outcome in older patients with ACS. All patients aged ?75?years, referred to a tertiary cardiovascular centre in the North East of England for coronary angiography with a view to urgent percutaneous coronary intervention, were screened for inclusion. A screening log was prospectively maintained, and a detailed analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with recruitment and non-recruitment to ICON-1.

Results: Of the 629 patients screened over 34?months, 457 (72.7%) satisfied the a priori-defined study inclusion/exclusion criteria. Of those eligible to participate, 300 (68.5%) provided informed consent and were recruited to the study; 59 (13.5%) were unable to consent due to a lack of capacity or limitations in communication, and 79 patients (18.0%) declined to participate in the study. Those lacking adequate capacity to consent were older than those able to provide informed consent (83.0±4.7 vs 81.0±4.7?years, p=0.002). Women were more likely to decline than men (25.1% vs 10.0%, p<0.001).

Conclusions: The recruitment of patients was robust, comparing favourably to previous longitudinal studies within this age group. Although enrolling older people to research remains challenging, this cohort is enthusiastic to participate. The contribution of older patients must not be ignored, particularly in the setting of an ever-ageing population, in whom cardiovascular disease burden is high.

Trial registration number: NCT01933581; Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Sinclair H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4975868 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Engaging older patients in cardiovascular research: observational analysis of the ICON-1 study.

Sinclair Hannah H Batty Jonathan A JA Qiu Weiliang W Kunadian Vijay V

Open heart 20160803 2

<h4>Background</h4>As a consequence of population ageing, the number of older patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is increasing. The historical underrepresentation of older patients in many pivotal ACS clinical trials undermines the practice of evidence-based medicine in this high-risk cohort. This study evaluates the feasibility of recruitment of older patients to a longitudinal, clinical study.<h4>Methods</h4>The study to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in high-risk patieNts ...[more]

PMID: 27547431

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLatinx individuals are disproportionally burdened by kidney diseases compared to non-Latinx White individuals and are underrepresented in kidney-related research. We aimed to describe stakeholder perspectives on Latinx patient engagement in kidney-related research.MethodsWe conducted a thematic analysis of two online moderated discussions and an interactive online survey with open-text responses involving participants (i.e. stakeholders), with personal and/or professional experiences with Latinx patients with kidney diseases and their families/caregivers.ResultsAmong the eight stakeholders (Female:75%; Latinx ethnicity:88%), there were three physicians, one nurse, one patient with kidney disease who received a kidney transplant, one policy maker, one Doctor of Philosophy, and one executive director of a non-profit health organization. We identified five themes. The majority of themes and their respective subthemes (in parentheses) reflected barriers to engagement: Lack of personal relevance (unable to relate to research staff and marketing resources, and unclear benefit of research to self, family, and community); fear and vulnerability (immigration concerns, stigma with seeking care, skepticism of Western medicine); logistical and financial barriers (limited opportunities to enroll in clinical trials, out-of-pocket costs, transportation issues); and distrust and asymmetry of power (related to limited English proficiency or health literacy, and provider bias). The last theme centered on stimulating interest and establishing trust in the research process.ConclusionsTo overcome barriers to engagement in kidney-related research and establish trust among potential Latinx research participants, stakeholders recommended employing cultural responsiveness and community-based strategies. These strategies can help identify local health priorities, enhance research recruitment and retention strategies, and establish partnerships that continue to elevate research endeavors aiming to enhance the health of Latinx individuals with kidney diseases.

Project description:With the increase in patient and consumer activism through the late twentieth century and into this century, patient roles in research evolved into a new model of research engagement, with patients serving as active advisors and co-leading or leading clinical research. By requiring active engagement of patients and other stakeholders, several government research funders have advanced this model, particularly in Canada, the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and Australia. A consortium of individuals from these countries formed a Multi-Stakeholder Engagement (MuSE) consortium to examine critical issues in engaged research, establish consensus on definitions, and provide guidance for the field, beginning with an overview of how to involve stakeholders in health research (Concannon et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(3):458-463) and continuing here with an examination of definitions of research engagement. The political and advocacy roots of engaged research are reflected in definitions. Engagement is conceptualized with reference to research project goals, from informing specific clinical decisions to informing health-system level decisions. Political and cultural differences across countries are evident. Some of these government funders focus on empirical rather than ethical rationales. In countries with centralized health technology assessment, the link between societal values and engaged research is explicit. Ethical rationales for engagement are explicit in most of the published literature on research engagement. Harmonization of definitions is recommended so that research engagement elements, methods, and outcomes and impacts can be clearly examined and understood, and so that the field of research engagement can proceed from a clear conceptual foundation. Specific recommendations for terminology definitions are provided. Placing engaged research on a continuum from specific clinical decisions to more global public and social justice concerns clarifies the type of engaged research, supports appropriate comparisons, and improves the rigor of engaged research methods. The results help identify knowledge gaps in this growing field.

Project description:BackgroundStakeholder engagement helps ensure that research is relevant, clinical innovations are responsive, and healthcare services are patient-centered.ObjectiveEstablish and sustain a Veteran engagement board involving older Veterans and caregivers to provide input on aging-related research and clinical demonstration projects.Design and participantsThe Older Veteran Engagement Team (OVET)-a group of eight Veterans and one caregiver who range in age from 62 to 92-was formed in November 2017 and has met monthly since January 2018. The OVET provides feedback on topics that reflect the foci of the VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) (e.g., physical functioning, hearing health, and emotional wellness/mental health). Ongoing evaluation documents the return on investment of Veteran engagement.Main measuresThe OVET member and provider/investigator meeting evaluations with longitudinal follow-up at 6 and 12 months.ResultsReturn on investment of Veteran engagement is multi-faceted. For OVET, ROI ranges from grant support to improved healthcare quality/efficiency to social-emotional benefits. To date, funding awards total over $2.3 M for NIH and VA-funded projects to which OVET provided substantive feedback. Documented impacts on healthcare services include reductions in patient wait times, more appropriate utilization of services and increased patient satisfaction. Social-emotional benefits include generativity, as OVET members contribute to improving clinical and community-based supports for other Veterans. The OVET provides an opportunity for older Veterans to share their lived experience with trainees and early career investigators who are preparing for careers serving Veterans.ConclusionThe OVET is similar to other established stakeholder engagement groups; team members offer their individual viewpoints at any stage of research, clinical demonstration, or quality improvement projects. The OVET provides a mechanism for the voice of older Veterans and caregivers to shape aspects of individual projects. Importantly, these projects support patient-centered care and promote the characteristics of an age-friendly healthcare system.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2017, the British Columbia (Canada) SUPPORT (SUpport for People and Patient-Oriented Research) Unit created six methods clusters to advance methodologies in patient and public oriented research (POR). The knowledge translation (KT)/implementation science methods cluster identified that although there was guidance about how to involve patients and public members in POR research generally, little was known about how best to involve patients and public members on teams specifically exploring POR KT/implementation science methodologies. The purpose of this self-study was to explore what it means to engage patients and the public in studies of POR methods through the reflections of members of five KT/implementation science teams.MethodsInformed by a collaborative action research approach, this quality improvement self-study focused on reflection within four KT/implementation science research teams in 2020-2021. The self-study included two rounds of individual interviews with 18 members across four teams. Qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach followed by a structured discussion of preliminary findings with the research teams. Subsequently, through two small group discussion sessions, the patients/public members from the teams refined the findings.ResultsUndertaking research on POR KT/implementation science methodologies typically requires teams to work with the uncertainty of exploratory and processual research approaches, make good matches between patients/public members and the team, work intentionally yet flexibly, and be attuned to the external context and its influences on the team. POR methodological research teams need to consider that patients/public members bring their life experiences and world views to the research project. They become researchers in their own right. Individual and team reflection allows teams to become aware of team needs, acknowledge team members' vulnerabilities, gain greater sensitivity, and enhance communication.ConclusionsThe iterative self-study process provided research team members with opportunities for reflection and new understanding. Working with patients/public team members as co-researchers opens up new ways of understanding important aspects of research methodologies, which may influence future KT/implementation science research approaches.

Dataset Information

Engaging older patients in cardiovascular research: observational analysis of the ICON-1 study.

Publications

Engaging older patients in cardiovascular research: observational analysis of the ICON-1 study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets