Dataset Information

Using Collaborative Partnerships to Engage Firefighters in Rural Communities.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to utilize community-based participatory research (CBPR) methods to identify behaviors that may increase the exposure rates of firefighters to carcinogens and other occupational hazards. Key informant interviews and focus groups were conducted as part of a larger study that included exposure assessments at fire stations, in fire engines, and in personal vehicles. A purposive sample of five fire chiefs and leaders of the firefighter association was chosen, and these individuals were selected to participate in interviews. Unstructured interviews explored issues related to firefighter exposures and occupational hazards. Three focus groups were conducted over a three-month period. Following the focus groups, survey questions emphasizing the following three aspects of firefighting were developed: exposure to airborne smoke contaminants during fire suppression, accumulated exposure on turnout gear after fire suppression, and exposure to airborne contaminants at the fire departments. The use of community-based participatory research can be very beneficial, especially when conducting research with a group that may be hard to reach or have misgivings regarding researchers. By utilizing this approach in the current study, researchers were able to partner with a community that may be hard to reach and gain buy-in from community leadership.

SUBMITTER: Taylor R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8871703 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Using Collaborative Partnerships to Engage Firefighters in Rural Communities.

Taylor Ritchie R Macy Gretchen G Hwang Jooyeon J Golla Vijay V Cann Charles C Sanyang Edrisa E

International journal of environmental research and public health 20220211 4

The purpose of this study was to utilize community-based participatory research (CBPR) methods to identify behaviors that may increase the exposure rates of firefighters to carcinogens and other occupational hazards. Key informant interviews and focus groups were conducted as part of a larger study that included exposure assessments at fire stations, in fire engines, and in personal vehicles. A purposive sample of five fire chiefs and leaders of the firefighter association was chosen, and these ...[more]

PMID: 35206197

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAn unequal distribution of health personnel, leading to unfavourable differences in health status between urban and rural populations, is a serious cause for concern globally. Part of the solution to this problem lies in attracting medical doctors to rural, remote communities, which presents a real challenge. The present study therefore explored the factors that influence medical doctors' decision to practise in rural Ghana.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional descriptive study based on questionnaires. Participants were doctors working in health facilities in the districts and rural areas of the Northern Region, Ghana. The qualitative data analysis consisted of an iterative process of open, axial and selective coding.ResultsWe administered the questionnaires to 40 doctors, 27 of whom completed and returned the form, signalling a response rate of 67.5%. The majority of the doctors were male (88.9%) and had been trained at the University for Development Studies, School of Medicine and Health Sciences (UDS-SMHS) (63%). Although they had chosen to work in the remote areas, they identified a number of factors that could prevent future doctors from accepting rural postings, such as: a lack of social amenities, financial and material resources; limited career progression opportunities; and too little emphasis on rural practice in medical school curricula. Moreover, respondents flagged specific stakeholders who, in their opinion, had a major role to play in the attraction of doctors and in convincing them to work in remote areas.ConclusionsThe medical doctors we surveyed had gravitated to the rural areas themselves for the opportunity to acquire clinical skills and gain experience and professional independence. Nevertheless, they felt that in order to attract such cadre of health professionals to rural areas and retain them there, specific challenges needed addressing. For instance, they called for an enforceable, national policy on rural postings, demanding strong political commitment and leadership. Another recommendation flowing from the study findings is to extend the introduction of Community-Based Education and Service (COBES) or similar curriculum components to other medical schools in order to prepare students for rural practice, increasing the likelihood of them accepting rural postings.

Project description:PurposeToday's clinical trial partnerships frequently join multi-disciplinary investigators and stakeholders, from different countries and cultures, to conduct research with a broad array of goals. This diversity, while a strength, can also foster divergent views about priorities and what constitutes success, thereby posing challenges for management, operations, and evaluation. As a sponsor and partner in such collaborations, we seek to assist and support their development and implementation of sound research strategies, to optimize their efficiency, sustainability, and public health impact. This report describes our efforts using an adaptation of the well-established Kaplan-Norton strategy management paradigm, in our clinical trials setting. We share findings from our first test of the utility and acceptance of this approach for evaluating and managing research strategies in a collaborative clinical research partnership.ResultsFindings from pilot studies and our first implementation in an ongoing clinical research partnership in Liberia, provide initial support for our hypothesis that an adapted version of the Kaplan-Norton strategy management model can have use in this setting. With leadership from within the partnership, analysis artifacts were gathered, and assessments made using standardized tools. Practical feasibility, resonance of the findings with partners, and convergence with other empirical assessments lend initial support for the view that this approach holds promise for obtaining meaningful, useable results for assessing and improving clinical research management.Conclusions and implicationsEngaged leadership, thoughtful timing to align with partnership planning cycles, support for the process, and an eye towards the collaboration's long-term goals appear important for developing model understanding and practice. Skepticism about evaluations, and unease at exposing weaknesses, may hinder the effort. Acceptance of findings and associated opportunities for improvement by group leadership, support a growing sense of validity. Next steps aim to test the approach in other partnerships, streamline the methodology for greater ease of use, and seek possible correlations of strategy management assessments with performance evaluation. There is hardly a better example than the COVID-19 pandemic, to spotlight the need for efficient and effective clinical research partnerships to address global health challenges. While heartened by the collaborative spirit driving the effort so far, we cannot let our enthusiasm lull us into thinking that nobility of purpose or an abundance of good will is sufficient. Careful monitoring and adjustment of clinical research strategy in response to changes (e.g., demographics, pathogen evolution, research acceptance, political and cultural environments) are vital to making the needed adjustments that can guide these programs toward successful outcomes. We hope that our work can raise awareness about the importance, relevance, and feasibility of sound strategy management in clinical research partnerships, especially during this time when there is so much at stake.

Project description:BackgroundDespite growing enthusiasm for co-production in healthcare services and research, research on co-production practices is lacking. Multiple frameworks, guidelines and principles are available but little empirical research is conducted on 'how to do' co-production of research to improve healthcare services. This paper brings together insights from UK-based collaborative research partnerships on leading co-production. Its aim is to inform practical guidance for new partnerships planning to facilitate the co-production of applied health research in the future.MethodsUsing an auto-ethnographic approach, experiential evidence was elicited through collective sense making from recorded conversations between the research team and senior leaders of five UK-based collaborative research partnerships. This approach applies a cultural analysis and interpretation of the leaders' behaviours, thoughts and experiences of co-production taking place in 2008-2018 and involving academics, health practitioners, policy makers and representatives of third sector organisations.ResultsThe findings highlight a variety of practices across CLAHRCs, whereby the intersection between the senior leaders' vision and local organisational context in which co-production occurs largely determines the nature of co-production process and outcomes. We identified four tensions in doing co-production: (1) idealistic, tokenistic vs realistic narratives, (2) power differences and (lack of) reciprocity, (3) excluding vs including language and communication, (4) individual motivation vs structural issues.ConclusionsThe tensions were productive in helping collaborative research partnerships to tailor co-production practices to their local needs and opportunities. Resulting variation in co-production practices across partnerships can therefore be seen as highly advantageous creative adaptation, which makes us question the utility of seeking a unified 'gold standard' of co-production. Strategic leadership is an important starting point for finding context-tailored solutions; however, development of more distributed forms of leadership over time is needed to facilitate co-production practices between partners. Facilitating structures for co-production can enable power sharing and boost capacity and capability building, resulting in more inclusive language and communication and, ultimately, more credible practices of co-production in research. We provide recommendations for creating more realistic narratives around co-production and facilitating power sharing between partners.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Access to diabetes education and resources for diabetes self-management is limited in rural communities, despite higher rates of diabetes in rural populations compared with urban populations. Technology and mobile health (mHealth) interventions can reduce barriers and improve access to diabetes education in rural communities. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) and financial incentives can be used with mHealth interventions to increase the uptake of diabetes education; however, studies have not examined their combined use for diabetes self-management in rural settings. OBJECTIVE:This two-phase Stage 1 feasibility study aimed to use a mixed methods design to examine the feasibility and acceptability of an mHealth diabetes education program combining SBIRT and financial incentives to engage rural individuals. METHODS:In Phase 1, we aimed to develop, adapt, and refine the intervention protocol. In Phase 2, a 3-month quasi-experimental study was conducted with individuals from 2 rural communities in South Texas. Study participants were individuals who attended free diabetes screening events in their community. Those with low or medium risk received health education material, whereas those with high risk or those with a previous diagnosis of diabetes participated in motivational interviewing and enrolled in the 6-week mHealth Diabetes Self-Management Education Program under either an unconditional or aversion incentive contract. The participants returned for a 3-month follow-up. Feasibility and acceptability of the intervention were determined by the rate of participant recruitment and retention, the fidelity of program delivery and compliance, and the participant's satisfaction with the intervention program. RESULTS:Of the 98 screened rural community members in South Texas, 72 individuals met the study eligibility and 62 individuals agreed to enroll in the study. The sample was predominately female and Hispanic, with an average age of 52.6 years. The feedback from study participants indicated high levels of satisfaction with the mHealth diabetes education program. In the poststudy survey, the participants reported high levels of confidence to continue lifestyle modifications, that is, weight loss, physical activity, and diet. The retention rate was 50% at the 3-month follow-up. Participation in the intervention was high at the beginning and dissipated in the later weeks regardless of the incentive contract type. Positive changes were observed in weight (mean -2.64, SD 6.01; P<.05) and glycemic control index (-.30; P<.05) in all participants from baseline to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:The finding showed strong feasibility and acceptability of study recruitment and enrollment. The participants' participation and retention were reasonable given the unforeseen events that impacted the study communities during the study period. Combining mHealth with SBIRT has the potential to reach individuals with need to participate in diabetes education in rural communities.

Project description:BackgroundThere are few examples of the practical application of the concepts of social accountability, as defined by the World Bank and WHO, to health system change. This paper describes a robust approach led by First Nations Health Authority and the Rural Coordination Centre of British Columbia. This was achieved using partnerships in British Columbia, Canada, where the health system features inequities in service and outcomes for rural and Indigenous populations. Social accountability is achieved when all stakeholders come together simultaneously as partners and agree on a path forward. This approach has enabled socially accountable healthcare, effecting change in the healthcare system by addressing the needs of the population.InnovationOur innovative approach uses social accountability engagement to counteract persistent health inequities. This involves an adaptation of the Boelen Health Partnership model (policymakers, health administrators, health professionals, academics and community members) extended by addition of linked sectors (eg, industry and not-for-profits) to the 'Partnership Pentagram Plus'. We used appreciative inquiry and deliberative dialogue focused on the rural scale and integrating Indigenous ways of knowing along with western scientific traditions ('two-eyed seeing'). Using this approach, partners are brought together to identify common interests and direction as a learning community. Equitable engagement and provision of space as 'peers' and 'partners' were key to this process. Groups with varying perspectives came together to create solutions, building on existing strengths and new collaborative approaches to address specific issues in the community and health services delivery. A resulting provincial table reflecting the Pentagram Plus model has fostered policies and practices over the last 3 years that have resulted in meaningful collaborations for health service change.ConclusionThis paper presents the application of the 'Partnership Pentagram Plus' approach and uses appreciative inquiry and deliberative dialogue to bring about practical and positive change to rural and Indigenous communities.

Dataset Information

Using Collaborative Partnerships to Engage Firefighters in Rural Communities.

Publications

Using Collaborative Partnerships to Engage Firefighters in Rural Communities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets