Dataset Information

Engaging People and Co-Producing Research with Persons and Communities to Foster Person-Centred Care: A Meta-Synthesis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Engagement and co-production in healthcare research and innovation are crucial for delivering person-centred interventions in underserved communities, but the knowledge of effective strategies to target this population is still vague, limiting the provision of person-centred care. Our research aimed to identify essential knowledge to foster engagement and co-production.

Materials and methods

A meta-synthesis research design was used to compile existing qualitative research papers on health communication, engagement, and empowerment in vulnerable groups in high-income countries (HICs) from 2008 to 2018. A total of 23 papers were selected and analysed.

Results

'Design and recruitment' and 'engagement and co-production' thematic areas are presented considering the factors related to researcher-communities attunement and the strategical plans for conducting research. The insights are discussed in light of the literature. Long-term alliances, sustainable structures, and strengthened bonds are critical factors for producing real long-term change, empowering persons and communities, and paving the way to person-centred care.

Conclusions

The enhancement of the recruitment, involvement, and empowerment of traditionally disengaged communities and individuals depends on the awareness and analysis of social determinants, power differentials and specific tactics, and the capacity of researchers and individuals to apply all these principles in real-world practice.

SUBMITTER: Acha BV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8656837 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient engagement in research is the meaningful and collaborative interaction between patients and researchers throughout the research process. Patient engagement can help to ensure patient-oriented values and perspectives are incorporated into the development, conduct, and dissemination of research. While patient engagement is increasingly prevalent in clinical research, it remains relatively unrealized in preclinical laboratory research. This may reflect the nature of preclinical research, in which routine interactions or engagement with patients may be less common. Our team of patient partners and researchers has previously identified few published examples of patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, as well as a paucity of guidance on this topic. Here we propose the development of a process framework to facilitate patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research.MethodsOur team, inclusive of researchers and patient partners, will develop a comprehensive, empirically-derived, and stakeholder-informed process framework for 'patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research.' First, our team will create a 'deliberative knowledge space' to conduct semi-structured discussions that will inform a draft framework for preclinical patient engagement. Over the course of several sessions, we will identify actions, activities, barriers, and enablers (e.g. considerations and motivations for patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, define roles of key players). The resulting draft process framework will be further populated with examples and refined through an international consensus-building Delphi survey with patients, researchers, and other collaborator organizations. We will then conduct pilot field tests to evaluate the framework with preclinical laboratory research groups paired with patient partners. These results will be used to create a refined framework enriched with real-world examples and considerations. All resources developed will be made available through an online repository.DiscussionOur proposed process framework will provide guidance, best practices, and standardized procedures to promote patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. Supporting and facilitating patient engagement in this setting presents an exciting new opportunity to help realize the important impact that patients can make.

Project description:IntroductionEffective engagement of underrepresented communities in health research and policy remains a challenge due to barriers that hinder participation. Our study had two objectives: (1) identify themes of person-centred care (PCC) from perspectives of diverse patients/caregivers that would inform the development of person-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs) for evaluating the quality of PCC and initiatives to improve PCC and (2) explore innovative participatory approaches to engage ethnocultural communities in qualitative research.MethodsDrawing on participatory action research methods, we partnered with a community-based organization to train six 'Community Brokers' from the Chinese, Filipino, South Asian, Latino-Hispanic, East African and Syrian communities, who were engaged throughout the study. We also partnered with the provincial health organization to engage their Patient and Family Advisory, who represented further aspects of diversity. We conducted focus group discussions with patients/caregivers to obtain their perspectives on their values, preferences and needs regarding PCC. We identified themes through our study and engaged provincial stakeholders to prioritize these themes for informing the development of PC-QIs and codesign initiatives for improving PCC.ResultsEight focus groups were conducted with 66 diverse participants. Ethnocultural communities highlighted themes related to access and cost of care, language barriers and culture, while the Patient and Family Advisory emphasized patient and caregiver engagement. Together with provincial stakeholders, initiatives were identified to improve PCC, such as codesigning innovative models of training and evaluation of healthcare providers.ConclusionIncorporating patient and community voices requires addressing issues related to equity and understanding barriers to effective and meaningful engagement.Patient or public contributionPatient and public engagement was central to our research study. This included partnership with a community-based organization, with a broad network of ethnocultural communities, as well as the provincial health service delivery organization, who both facilitated the ongoing engagement of diverse patients/caregiver communities throughout our study including designing the study, recruiting participants, collecting and organizing data, interpreting findings and mobilizing knowledge. Drawing from participatory action research methods, patients and the public were involved in the codesign of the PC-QIs and initiatives to improve PCC in the province based on the findings from our study.

Project description:A wealth of viral data sits untapped in publicly available metagenomic data sets when it might be extracted to create a usable index for the virological research community. We hypothesized that work of this complexity and scale could be done in a hackathon setting. Ten teams comprised of over 40 participants from six countries, assembled to create a crowd-sourced set of analysis and processing pipelines for a complex biological data set in a three-day event on the San Diego State University campus starting 9 January 2019. Prior to the hackathon, 141,676 metagenomic data sets from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Sequence Read Archive (SRA) were pre-assembled into contiguous assemblies (contigs) by NCBI staff. During the hackathon, a subset consisting of 2953 SRA data sets (approximately 55 million contigs) was selected, which were further filtered for a minimal length of 1 kb. This resulted in 4.2 million (Mio) contigs, which were aligned using BLAST against all known virus genomes, phylogenetically clustered and assigned metadata. Out of the 4.2 Mio contigs, 360,000 contigs were labeled with domains and an additional subset containing 4400 contigs was screened for virus or virus-like genes. The work yielded valuable insights into both SRA data and the cloud infrastructure required to support such efforts, revealing analysis bottlenecks and possible workarounds thereof. Mainly: (i) Conservative assemblies of SRA data improves initial analysis steps; (ii) existing bioinformatic software with weak multithreading/multicore support can be elevated by wrapper scripts to use all cores within a computing node; (iii) redesigning existing bioinformatic algorithms for a cloud infrastructure to facilitate its use for a wider audience; and (iv) a cloud infrastructure allows a diverse group of researchers to collaborate effectively. The scientific findings will be extended during a follow-up event. Here, we present the applied workflows, initial results, and lessons learned from the hackathon.

Project description:BackgroundAgitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost.Methods and findingsThis was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen's D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI -7.39, -1.15; Cohen's D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI -7.07,-2.02; Cohen's D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen's D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62237498.