Dataset Information

Perceived Significance of Engagement in Research Prioritization Among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: A Qualitative Study.

ABSTRACT: Background:Patients and other stakeholders are increasingly engaging as partners in research, although how they perceive such experiences, particularly over the long term, is not well understood. Objective:To characterize how participants from a nondialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) research priority-setting project conducted 2 years previously perceived the significance of their involvement. Design:Qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured, individual interviews. Setting:Participants resided across Canada. Participants:Eligible participants included stakeholders (ie, patients with nondialysis CKD, caregivers, health care professionals, and policy makers) who had taken part in a prior CKD research priority-setting project. Measurements:We explored stakeholder experiences and perspectives on engagement in CKD research prioritization. Methods:We purposively sampled across stakeholder roles and engagement types (ie, involvement in the priority-setting workshop, wiki online tool, and/or steering committee). All interviews were conducted by a single investigator by telephone or face-to-face, and audio-recordings were transcribed verbatim. The data were inductively coded and analyzed by 2 investigators using a thematic analysis approach. Results:We conducted 23 interviews across stakeholder roles and engagement types. Participants appreciated the integration of distinct stakeholder communities of patients, researchers, and health care professionals that occurred through engagement in research priority setting. Their opportunity to interact with patients and others directly impacted by CKD outside of the clinical setting contributed to an enhanced understanding of the CKD lived experience and value of patient-oriented research. This interaction helped participants refine and refocus their commitment to patient-centered CKD care and research, characterized by enhanced knowledge and confidence (patients/caregivers), adaptations to existing clinical practices and policies (health care providers/policy makers), and subsequent research engagement. Limitations:The views of participants may not reflect those of individuals in other research or health care settings. Conclusions:Stakeholder engagement in nondialysis CKD research prioritization encouraged the integration of stakeholder communities, an appreciation of the CKD experience, and a refocusing of participants' commitment to research and care. Findings highlight considerations for future health research engaging stakeholders, particularly those living with CKD, as research partners.

SUBMITTER: Elliott MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6196622 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perceived Significance of Engagement in Research Prioritization Among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: A Qualitative Study.

Elliott Meghan J MJ Goodarzi Zahra Z Sale Joanna E M JEM Wilhelm Linda A LA Laupacis Andreas A Hemmelgarn Brenda R BR Straus Sharon E SE

Canadian journal of kidney health and disease 20181019

<h4>Background</h4>Patients and other stakeholders are increasingly engaging as partners in research, although how they perceive such experiences, particularly over the long term, is not well understood.<h4>Objective</h4>To characterize how participants from a nondialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) research priority-setting project conducted 2 years previously perceived the significance of their involvement.<h4>Design</h4>Qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured, individual interview ...[more]

PMID: 30364531

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose of Review:Patient engagement in research is increasingly recognized as an important component of the research process and may facilitate translation of research findings. To heighten awareness on this important topic, this review presents opportunities and challenges of patient engagement in research, drawing on specific examples from 4 areas of Canadian kidney research conducted by New Investigators in the Kidney Research Scientist Core Education and National Training (KRESCENT) Program. Sources of Information:Research expertise, published reports, peer-reviewed articles, and research funding body websites. Methods:In this review, the definition, purpose, and potential benefits of patient engagement in research are discussed. Approaches toward patient engagement that may help with translation and uptake of research findings into clinical practice are highlighted. Opportunities and challenges of patient engagement are presented in both basic science and clinical research with the following examples of kidney research: (1) precision care in focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis, (2) systems biology approaches to improve management of chronic kidney disease and enhance kidney graft survival, (3) reducing the incidence of suboptimal dialysis initiation, and (4) use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in kidney practice. Key Findings:Clinical research affords more obvious opportunities for patient engagement. The most obvious step at which to engage patients is in the setting of research priorities. Engagement at all stages of the research cycle may prove to be more challenging, and requires a detailed plan, along with funds and infrastructure to ensure that it is not merely tokenistic. Basic science research is several steps removed from the clinical application and involves complex scientific concepts, which makes patient engagement inherently more difficult. Limitations:This is a narrative review of the literature that has been partly influenced by the perspectives and experiences of the authors and focuses on research conducted by the authors. The evidence base to support the suggested benefits of patient engagement in research is currently limited. Implications:The formal incorporation of patients' priorities, perspectives, and experiences is now recognized as a key component of the research process. If patients and researchers are able to effectively work together, this could enhance research quality and efficiency. To effectively engage patients, proper infrastructure and dedicated funding are needed. Going forward, a rigorous evaluation of patient engagement strategies and their effectiveness will be needed.

Project description:BackgroundOlder patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) often live with unidentified frailty and multimorbidity. Despite guideline recommendations, geriatric assessment is not part of standard clinical care, resulting in a missed opportunity to enhance (clinical) outcomes including quality of life in these patients. To develop routine geriatric assessment programs for patients approaching ESKD, it is crucial to understand patients' and professionals' experiences with and perspectives about the benefits, facilitators and barriers for geriatric assessment.MethodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured focus group discussions were conducted with ESKD patients, caregivers and professionals. Participants were purposively sampled from three Dutch hospital-based study- and routine care initiatives involving geriatric assessment for (pre-)ESKD care. Transcripts were analysed inductively using thematic analysis.ResultsIn six focus-groups, participants (n = 47) demonstrated four major themes: (1) Perceived characteristics of the older (pre)ESKD patient group. Patients and professionals recognized increased vulnerability and (cognitive) comorbidity, which is often unrelated to calendar age. Both believed that often patients are in need of additional support in various geriatric domains. (2) Experiences with geriatric assessment. Patients regarded the content and the time spent on the geriatric assessment predominantly positive. Professionals emphasized that assessment creates awareness among the whole treatment team for cognitive and social problems, shifting the focus from mainly somatic to multidimensional problems. Outcomes of geriatric assessment were observed to enhance a dialogue on suitability of treatment options, (re)adjust treatment and provide/seek additional (social) support. (3) Barriers and facilitators for implementation of geriatric assessment in routine care. Discussed barriers included lack of communication about goals and interpretation of geriatric assessment, burden for patients, illiteracy, and organizational aspects. Major facilitators are good multidisciplinary cooperation, involvement of geriatrics and multidisciplinary team meetings. (4) Desired characteristics of a suitable geriatric assessment concerned the scope and use of tests and timing of assessment.ConclusionsPatients and professionals were positive about using geriatric assessment in routine nephrology care. Implementation seems achievable, once barriers are overcome and facilitators are endorsed. Geriatric assessment in routine care appears promising to improve (clinical) outcomes in patients approaching ESKD.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The interest for qualitative research methodology has expanded beyond theoretical academic research on medical education, gathering interest from all healthcare professionals. Qualitative research has potentials in exploring the social, emotional, psychological aspects of care and in broadening professionals' scientific competencies. Nonetheless, qualitative research has still not been embraced within formal and academic curricula for future professionals, preventing newer generations from appreciating the value of its epistemological and methodological aspects and from using it in the development and implementation of clinical research. The purpose of this study was to comprehend the attitudes of health professionals learning and conducting qualitative studies within a practical training program developed in their workplace. METHODS:The present work consisted of a focused ethnography, including 14 professionals during their one-year attendance training on qualitative research methodology. Strategies used for collecting data included participant observations, field notes, semi-structured interviews, and a focus group. All the data were analyzed consistently with ethnographic indications. RESULTS:Analyses allowed us to evidence the educational, motivational, group-related and organizational factors influencing the attitudes and skill acquisition of healthcare professionals learning and conducting qualitative research within a practical training program developed in their workplace. Prior educational background was perceived as a sort of barrier. Nonetheless, the training boosted a change in attitude both in terms of appreciation of the research approach and trainees' emotional involvement with research participants. Doing a qualitative study in a multidisciplinary team raised in-group dynamics that hindered bringing the studies to conclusion. Trainees repeatedly lamented the difficulty in managing time to devote to research-related activities and questioned the feasibility of adopting this methodology for conducting research in their workplace. CONCLUSIONS:Continual education training on the methodological aspects and practical implications of qualitative research may foster a renewed attitude towards one's professional education, while making inter-professional relationship issues emerge. Nonetheless, broadening the perspectives of professionals on their clinical practice by means of learning qualitative methodology may have an evident quality improvement return. Strategies for future qualitative research methodology hands-on training addressed to health professionals in continuing education are proposed.

Dataset Information

Perceived Significance of Engagement in Research Prioritization Among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: A Qualitative Study.

Publications

Perceived Significance of Engagement in Research Prioritization Among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals: A Qualitative Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets