Dataset Information

Pragmatic Considerations in Incorporating Stakeholder Engagement Into a Palliative Care Transitions Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Stakeholder involvement in health care research has been shown to improve research development, processes, and dissemination. The literature is developing on stakeholder engagement methods and preliminarily validated tools for evaluating stakeholder level of engagement have been proposed for specific stakeholder groups and settings.

Objectives

This paper describes the methodology for engaging a Study Advisory Committee (SAC) in research and reports on the use of a stakeholder engagement survey for measuring level of engagement.

Methods

Stakeholders with previous research connections were recruited to the SAC during the planning process for a multicenter randomized control clinical trial, which is ongoing at the time of this writing. All SAC meetings undergo qualitative analysis, while the Stakeholder Engagement Survey instrument developed by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is distributed annually for quantitative evaluation.

Results

The trial's SAC is composed of 18 members from 3 stakeholder groups: patients and their caregivers; patient advocacy organizations; and health care payers. After an initial in-person meeting, the SAC meets quarterly by telephone and annually in-person. The SAC monitors research progress and provides feedback on all study processes. The stakeholder engagement survey reveals improved engagement over time as well as continued challenges.

Conclusions

Stakeholder engagement in the research process has meaningfully contributed to the study design, patient recruitment, and preliminary analysis of findings.

SUBMITTER: de Forcrand C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8263137 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Comprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) Study is one of the first large pragmatic randomized-controlled clinical trials using comparative effectiveness research methods, funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. In the COMPASS Study, we compare the effectiveness of a patient-centered, transitional care intervention versus usual care for stroke patients discharged home from acute care. Outcomes include stroke patient post-discharge functional status and caregiver strain 90 days after discharge, and hospital readmissions. A central tenet of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded research is stakeholder engagement throughout the research process. However, evidence on how to successfully implement a pragmatic trial that changes systems of care in combination with robust stakeholder engagement is limited. This combination is not without challenges. METHODS:We present our approach for broad-based stakeholder engagement in the context of a pragmatic trial with the participation of patients, caregivers, community stakeholders, including the North Carolina Stroke Care Collaborative hospital network, and policy makers. To maximize stakeholder engagement throughout the COMPASS Study, we employed a conceptual model with the following components: (1) Patient and Other Stakeholder Identification and Selection; (2) Patient and Other Stakeholder Involvement Across the Spectrum of Research Activities; (3) Dedicated Resources for Patient and Other Stakeholder Involvement; (4) Support for Patient and Other Stakeholder Engagement Through Organizational Processes; (5) Communication with Patients and Other Stakeholders; (6) Transparent Involvement Processes; (7) Tracking of Engagement; and (8) Evaluation of Engagement. CONCLUSION:In this paper, we describe how each component of the model is being implemented and how this approach addresses existing gaps in the literature on strategies for engaging stakeholders in meaningful and useful ways when conducting pragmatic trials.

Project description:BackgroundInvolving patient and community stakeholders in clinical trials adds value by ensuring research prioritizes patient goals both in conduct of the study and application of the research. The use of stakeholder committees and their impact on the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial have been underreported clinically and academically. The aim of this study is to describe how Study Advisory Committee (SAC) recommendations were implemented throughout the Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) trial. EMPallA is a multi-center, pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care of older adults with advanced illness.MethodsA SAC consisting of 18 individuals, including patients with palliative care experience, members of healthcare organizations, and payers was convened for the EMPallA trial. The SAC engaged in community-based participatory research and assisted in all aspects from study design to dissemination. The SAC met with the research team quarterly and annually from project inception to dissemination. Using meeting notes and recordings we completed a qualitative thematic analysis using an iterative process to develop themes and subthemes to summarize SAC recommendations throughout the project's duration.ResultsThe SAC convened 16 times between 2017 and 2020. Over the course of the project, the SAC provided 41 unique recommendations. Twenty-six of the 41 (63%) recommendations were adapted into formal Institutional Review Board (IRB) study modifications. Recommendations were coded into four major themes: Scientific, Pragmatic, Resource and Dissemination. A majority of the recommendations were related to either the Scientific (46%) or Pragmatic (29%) themes. Recommendations were not mutually exclusive across three study phases: Preparatory, execution and translational. A vast majority (94%) of the recommendations made were related to the execution phase. Major IRB study modifications were made based on their recommendations including data collection of novel dependent variables and expanding recruitment to Spanish-speaking patients.ConclusionsOur study provides an example of successful integration of a SAC in the conduct of a pragmatic, multi-center RCT. Future trials should engage with SACs in all study phases to ensure trials are relevant, inclusive, patient-focused, and attentive to gaps between health care and patient and family needs.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03325985, 10/30/2017.

Project description:Background overview and rationaleWe co-developed a multi-component virtual care solution (TtLIVE) for the home mechanical ventilation (HMV) population using the aTouchAway™ platform (Aetonix). The TtLIVE intervention includes (1) virtual home visits; (2) customizable care plans; (3) clinical workflows that incorporate reminders, completion of symptom profiles, and tele-monitoring; and (4) digitally secure communication via messaging, audio, and video calls; (5) Resource library including print and audiovisual material.Objectives and brief methodsOur primary objective is to evaluate the TtLIVE intervention compared to a usual care control group using an eight-center, pragmatic, parallel-group single-blind (outcome assessors) randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients are children and adults newly transitioning to HMV in Ontario, Canada. Our target sample size is 440 participants (220 each arm). Our co-primary outcomes are a number of emergency department (ED) visits in the 12 months after randomization and change in family caregiver (FC) reported Pearlin Mastery Scale score from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcomes also measured in the 12 months post randomization include healthcare utilization measured using a hybrid Ambulatory Home Care Record (AHCR-hybrid), FC burden using the Zarit Burden Interview, and health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D. In addition, we will conduct a cost-utility analysis over a 1-year time horizon and measure process outcomes including healthcare provider time using the Care Coordination Measurement Tool. We will use qualitative interviews in a subset of study participants to understand acceptability, barriers, and facilitators to the TtLIVE intervention. We will administer the Family Experiences with Care Coordination (FECC) to interview participants. We will use Poisson regression for a number of ED visits at 12 months. We will use linear regression for the Pearlin Mastery scale score at 12 months. We will adjust for the baseline score to estimate the effect of the intervention on the primary outcomes. Analysis of secondary outcomes will employ regression, causal, and linear mixed modeling. Primary analysis will follow intention-to-treat principles. We have Research Ethics Board approval from SickKids, Children's Hospital Eastern Ontario, McMaster Children's Hospital, Children's Hospital-London Health Sciences, Sunnybrook Hospital, London Health Sciences, West Park Healthcare Centre, and Ottawa Hospital.DiscussionThis pragmatic randomized controlled single-blind trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the TtLIVE virtual care solution compared to usual care while providing important data on patient and family experience, as well as process measures such as healthcare provider time to deliver the intervention.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04180722 . Registered on November 27, 2019.

Project description:Background Palliative care supports quality of life, symptom control, and goal setting in heart failure (HF) patients. Unlike hospice, palliative care does not restrict life-prolonging therapy. This study examined the association between palliative care during hospitalization for HF on the subsequent transitions and procedures. Methods and Results Veterans admitted to hospitals with HF from 2010 to 2015 were randomly selected for the Veterans Administration External Peer Review Program. Variables pertaining to demographic, clinical, laboratory, and usage were captured from Veterans Administration electronic records. Patients receiving hospice services before admission were excluded. Patients who received palliative care were propensity matched to those who did not. The primary outcomes were whether the patient experienced transitions or procedures in the 6 months after admission. Transitions included multiple readmissions (≥2) or intensive care admissions and procedures included mechanical ventilation, pacemaker implantation, or defibrillator implantation. Among 57 182 hospitalized HF patients, 1431 received palliative care, and were well matched to 1431 without (standardized mean differences ≤ ±0.05 on all matched variables). Palliative care was associated with significantly fewer multiple rehospitalizations (30.9% versus 40.3%, P<0.001), mechanical ventilation (2.8% versus 5.4%, P=0.004), and defibrillator implantation (2.1% versus 3.6%, P=0.01). After adjustment for facility fixed effects, palliative care consultation was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of multiple readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio=0.73, 95% CI, 0.64-0.84) and mechanical ventilation (adjusted hazard ratio=0.76, 95% CI, 0.67-0.87). Conclusions Palliative care during HF admissions was associated with fewer readmissions and less mechanical ventilation. When available, engagement of HF patients and caregivers in palliative care for symptom control, quality of life, and goals of care discussions may be associated with reduced rehospitalizations and mechanical ventilation.

Project description:Participatory research approaches have developed in response to the growing emphasis on translation of research evidence into practice. However, there are few published examples of stakeholder engagement strategies, and little guidance specific to larger ongoing research programs or those with a rural focus. This paper describes the evolution, structure, and processes of an annual Rural Dementia Summit launched in 2008 as an engagement strategy for the Rural Dementia Action Research (RaDAR) program and ongoing for more than 10 years; and reports findings from a parallel mixed-methods study that includes stakeholder and researcher perspectives on the Summit's value and impact. Twelve years of stakeholder evaluations were analyzed. Rating scale data were summarized with descriptive statistics; open-ended questions were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis. A thematic analysis was also used to analyze interviews with RaDAR researchers. Rating scale data showed high stakeholder satisfaction with all aspects of the Summit. Five themes were identified in the qualitative data: hearing diverse perspectives, building connections, collaborating for change, developing research and practice capacity, and leaving recharged. Five themes were identified in the researcher data: impact on development as a researcher, understanding stakeholder needs, informing research design, deepening commitment to rural dementia research, and building a culture of engagement. These findings reflect the key principles and impacts of stakeholder engagement reported in the literature. Additional findings include the value stakeholders place on connecting with stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, how the Summit was revitalizing, and how it developed stakeholder capacity to support change in their communities. Findings indicate that the Summit has developed into a community of practice where people with a common interest come together to learn and collaborate to improve rural dementia care. The Summit's success and sustainability are linked to RaDAR's responsiveness to stakeholder needs, the trust that has been established, and the value that stakeholders and researchers find in their participation.

Project description:ObjectivesNurses are generally present, and often influential, in supporting patient and family acceptance of medical futility and in assisting doctors in negotiating referral to palliative care. Yet the specificities of the nursing role and how nurses may contribute to timely and effective referrals is not well understood. This study aimed to systematically explore hospital-based nurses' accounts of the transition to palliative care, and the potential role of nurses in facilitating more effective palliative care transitions.DesignQualitative study using semistructured interviews.SettingTwo health services with public as well as private clinical environments in a major metropolitan area of Australia.ParticipantsHospital-based nurses (n=20) who regularly work with patients at the point of referral and in managing transitions to palliative care.ResultsFour significant themes emerged from thematic analysis. These include: (1) professional dynamics and the roles played by nurses in initiating the transition to palliative care; (2) the value of nurses' informal interactions in timely and effective transitions; (3) the emerging challenge of managing task-oriented nursing versus intense emotional nursing work at the point of medical futility and (4) the emotional burden experienced by nurses within this clinical context. Nurses self-reported occupying critical albeit complex roles in the management of medical futility and the transition to palliative care. They reported experiencing significant emotional burden in balancing interpersonal and interprofessional relationships during this time.ConclusionsThe results suggest that nurses may be utilised in a more formalised and systematic fashion in the context of managing medical futility and the need to topicalise the transition, with the focus shifted away from medical referrals towards more team-based and patient-centred timely transitions. Further research focused on the experiences of doctors, allied health professionals, patients and families is required to provide a broader interdisciplinary understanding of futility and contributions to the negotiation of palliative care.