Search

In 2019, the Society for Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery (ERAS-CS) published perioperative guidelines to optimize the care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. For centers with limited capacity, a sequential approach to the implementation of the full guidelines may be more feasible. Therefore, we aimed to explore the priority of implementation of the ERAS-CS guideline recommendations from a patient and caregiver perspective.Using a modified nominal group technique, individuals who previously underwent cardiac surgery and their caregivers ranked ERAS-CS recommendations within 3 time points (ie, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) and across 2 to 3 voting rounds. Final round rankings (median, mean and first quartile) were used to determine relative priorities.Seven individuals (5 patients and 2 caregivers) participated in the study. Patient engagement tools (2, 2.29, and 1.50), surgical site infection reduction (2, 1.67, and 1.25), and postoperative systematic delirium screening (1, 2.43, and 1.00) were the top-ranked ERAS-CS recommendations in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative time points, respectively.Exploration of patient and caregiver priorities may provide important insights to guide the healthcare team with clinical pathway development and implementation. Further study is needed to understand the impact of the integration of patient and caregiver values on effective and sustainable clinical pathway implementation.

At present, there is a lack of information on patient and caregiver values, and perceived priorities and barriers, to guide successful post-discharge recovery. This was a single center, multiple methods study that investigated patient, caregiver, and health care provider perceptions of the discharge process after cardiac surgery. Themes emerging from focus group discussions with patients and caregivers were used to develop surveys relating to values, barriers, and challenges relating to the discharge process. Thirty-two patients (n = 16) and caregivers (n = 16) participated in four separate focus groups. Four themes emerged from these discussions: (1) a lack of understanding about what the discharge process entails and when discharge is appropriate, (2) issues relating to the information provided to patients at the time of discharge, (3) participant experiences with the health care system, and (4) the experiences of caregivers. Seventy-eight patients, 34 caregivers, 53 nurses and/or other allied health professionals, and 8 surgeons completed the cross-sectional surveys. The most important component of the discharge process for patients and caregivers was "knowing what to do in an emergency." Health care providers less accurately identified what caregivers perceived as the most important aspects of the discharge process.Statements relating to informational barriers to discharge were the most discordant among patient and caregiver respondents. After discharge, patients and caregivers identified the need for longer-term follow up with the surgeon and more support in the community. Incorporation of patient and caregiver values to guide the post-cardiac surgery discharge process is essential to promote successful recovery.

Scoping reviews of health research are increasing in popularity. However, only a minority of scoping reviews in this sector engage patients and caregivers as co-producers of the research. Despite developments in scoping review methodology, which insist that stakeholder consultation is essential, no guiding methods exist to instruct the conduct of this stage. Thus, it is necessary to understand how patients and caregivers have been engaged as part of scoping reviews, toward a unifying methodology.We have developed a protocol for a scoping review of methods used to engage patients and caregivers in scoping reviews of health research. The search strategy will comprise two phases: the first will involve a secondary analysis of retrieved articles from a prior scoping review, and the second will identify articles that cite Levac et al.'s update to the original scoping review framework by Arksey and O'Malley. Titles and full texts of retrieved articles will be screened in duplicate. Inclusion will be limited to articles related to heath research that follow the six-stage scoping review framework by Arksey and O'Malley and that report patient engagement activities during at least one stage. The method of analysis of charted variables will be decided once data have been collected. Two patients will be engaged as collaborators throughout this review. We will also consult with patients, caregivers, and researchers upon completion of preliminary analyses.We anticipate that our scoping review will provide guidance for researchers seeking to involve health care stakeholders as co-producers of scoping reviews.A “scoping review” is a type of study that collects and summarizes published and unpublished research reports to better understand the amount and types of information available on a particular topic. There is a well-known framework for how to conduct a scoping review, which involves six stages. The sixth stage is optional, and involves consulting with people who have an interest in the research results (i.e., people who the research is “about” or who it will affect the most). Very few scoping reviews actually include this stage, potentially due to a lack of practical guidance on how to perform it. For scoping reviews related to health research, it is important to consult or more widely engage patients and caregivers in the scoping review’s conduct because these individuals have a unique type of knowledge that comes from their experience of a health issue, which can yield valuable insights. Therefore, we have designed a scoping review that will identify the ways in which patients and caregivers have been engaged in scoping reviews of health research in the past. We hope to produce recommendations to make it easier for other researchers to engage patients and caregivers in scoping reviews.

Mobile Health (mHealth) technologies are becoming integral to our healthcare system. This study evaluated the feasibility (compliance, usability and user satisfaction) of a mHealth application (app) for delivering Enhanced Recovery Protocols (ERPs) information to Cardiac Surgery (CS) patients peri-operatively. This single centre, prospective cohort study involved patients undergoing CS. Patients received a mHealth app developed for the study at consent and for 6–8 weeks post-surgery. Patients completed system usability, patient satisfaction and quality of life surveys pre- and post-surgery. A total of 65 patients participated in the study (mean age of 64 years). The app achieved an overall utilization rate of 75% (68% vs 81% for 65 and

IntroductionIn the past 20 years, the increasing burden of heart disease in an ageing population has resulted in cardiac surgery (CS) being offered to more frail and older patients with multiple comorbidities. Frailty and malnutrition are key geriatric syndromes that impact postoperative outcomes, including morbidity, mortality and prolonged hospital length of stay. Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs), such as prehabilitation, have been associated with a reduction in complications after CS in vulnerable patients. The use of nutritional ERPs may enhance short-term and long-term recovery and mitigate frailty progression while improving patient-reported outcomes.Methods and analysisThis trial is a two-centre, double-blinded, placebo, randomised controlled trial with blinded endpoint assessment and intention-to-treat analysis. One-hundred and fifty CS patients will be randomised to receive either a leucine-rich protein supplement or a placebo with no supplemented protein. Patients will consume their assigned supplement two times per day for approximately 2 weeks pre-procedure, during in-hospital postoperative recovery and for 8 weeks following discharge. The primary outcome will be the Short Physical Performance Battery score. Data collection will occur at four time points including baseline, in-hospital (pre-discharge), 2-month and 6-month time points post-surgery.Ethics and disseminationThe University of Manitoba Biomedical Research Ethics Board (20 March 2018) and the St Boniface Hospital Research Review Committee (28 June 2019) approved the trial protocol for the primary site in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. The second site’s (Montreal, Quebec) ethics has been submitted and pending approval from the Research Ethics and New Technology Development Committee for the Montreal Heart Institute (December 2020). Recruitment for the primary site started February 2020 and the second site will begin January 2021. Data gathered from the PROTein to Enhance outComes of (pre)frail paTients undergoing Cardiac Surgery Study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. Knowledge translation strategies will be created to share findings with stakeholders who are positioned to implement evidence-informed change.Potential study impactMalnutrition and frailty play a crucial role in post-CS recovery. Nutritional ERPs are increasingly being recognised as a clinically relevant aspect of perioperative care. As such, this trial is to determine if leucine-rich protein supplementation at key intervals can mitigate frailty progression and facilitate enhanced postoperative recovery.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04038294).

Background Despite the importance of their perspectives, end users (eg, patients, caregivers) are not typically engaged by academic researchers in the development of mobile health (mHealth) apps for perioperative cardiac surgery settings. Objective The aim of this study was to describe a process for and the impact of patient engagement in the development of an mHealth app that supports patient and caregiver involvement with enhanced recovery protocols during the perioperative period of cardiac surgery. Methods Engagement occurred at the level of consultation and took the form of an advisory panel. Patients who underwent cardiac surgery (2017-2018) at St. Boniface Hospital (Winnipeg, Manitoba) and their caregivers were approached for participation. A qualitative exploration determined the impact of patient engagement on the development (ie, design and content) of the mHealth app. This included a description of (1) the key messages generated by the advisory panel, (2) how key messages were incorporated into the development of the mHealth app, and (3) feedback from the developers of the mHealth app about the key messages generated by the advisory panel. Results The advisory panel (N=10) generated 23 key messages to guide the development of the mHealth app. Key design-specific messages (n=7) centered around access, tracking, synchronization, and reminders. Key content-specific messages (n=16) centered around medical terms, professional roles, cardiac surgery procedures and recovery, educational videos, travel, nutrition, medications, resources, and physical activity. This information was directly incorporated into the design of the mHealth app as long as it was supported by the existing functionalities of the underlying platform. For example, the platform did not support the scheduling of reminders by users, identifying drug interactions, or synchronizing with other devices. The developers of the mHealth app noted that key messages resulted in the integration of a vast range and volume of information and resources instead of ones primarily focused on surgical information, content geared toward expectations management, and an expanded focus to include caregivers and other family members, so that these stakeholders may be directly included in the provision of information, allowing them to be better informed, prepare along with the patient, and be involved in recovery planning. Conclusions Patient engagement may facilitate the development of a detail-oriented and patient-centered mHealth app whose design and content are driven by the lived experiences of end users.

BACKGROUND Despite the importance of their perspectives, end users (eg, patients, caregivers) are not typically engaged by academic researchers in the development of mobile health (mHealth) apps for perioperative cardiac surgery settings. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to describe a process for and the impact of patient engagement in the development of an mHealth app that supports patient and caregiver involvement with enhanced recovery protocols during the perioperative period of cardiac surgery. METHODS Engagement occurred at the level of consultation and took the form of an advisory panel. Patients who underwent cardiac surgery (2017-2018) at St. Boniface Hospital (Winnipeg, Manitoba) and their caregivers were approached for participation. A qualitative exploration determined the impact of patient engagement on the development (ie, design and content) of the mHealth app. This included a description of (1) the key messages generated by the advisory panel, (2) how key messages were incorporated into the development of the mHealth app, and (3) feedback from the developers of the mHealth app about the key messages generated by the advisory panel. RESULTS The advisory panel (N=10) generated 23 key messages to guide the development of the mHealth app. Key design-specific messages (n=7) centered around access, tracking, synchronization, and reminders. Key content-specific messages (n=16) centered around medical terms, professional roles, cardiac surgery procedures and recovery, educational videos, travel, nutrition, medications, resources, and physical activity. This information was directly incorporated into the design of the mHealth app as long as it was supported by the existing functionalities of the underlying platform. For example, the platform did not support the scheduling of reminders by users, identifying drug interactions, or synchronizing with other devices. The developers of the mHealth app noted that key messages resulted in the integration of a vast range and volume of information and resources instead of ones primarily focused on surgical information, content geared toward expectations management, and an expanded focus to include caregivers and other family members, so that these stakeholders may be directly included in the provision of information, allowing them to be better informed, prepare along with the patient, and be involved in recovery planning. CONCLUSIONS Patient engagement may facilitate the development of a detail-oriented and patient-centered mHealth app whose design and content are driven by the lived experiences of end users.

ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to describe the impact of patient engagement on the initial design and content of a mobile health (mHealth) technology that supports enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) for cardiac surgery.MethodsEngagement occurred at the level of consultation and took the form of an advisory panel. Patients that underwent cardiac surgery (2017-2018) at St. Boniface Hospital (Winnipeg, Manitoba) and consented to be contacted about future research, and their caregivers, were approached for participation. A qualitative exploration was undertaken to determine advisory panel members’ key messages about, and the impact of, patient engagement on mHealth technology design and content.ResultsTen individuals participated in the advisory panel. Key design-specific messages centered around access, tracking, synchronization, and reminders. Key content-specific messages centered around roles of cardiac surgery team members and medical terms, educational videos, information regarding cardiac surgery procedures, travel before/after surgery, nutrition (i.e., what to eat), medications (i.e., drug interactions), resources (i.e., medical devices), and physical activity (i.e., addressing fears and providing information, recommendations, and instructions). These key messages were a rich source of information for mHealth technology developers and were incorporated as supported by the existing capabilities of the underlying technology platform.ConclusionsPatient engagement facilitated the development of a mHealth technology whose design and content were driven by the lived experiences of cardiac surgery patients and caregivers. The result was a detail-oriented and patient-centered mHealth technology that helps to empower and inform patients and their caregivers about the patient journey across the perioperative period of cardiac surgery.KEY QUESTIONSWhat is already known about this subject?Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) have been proposed as a clinical strategy to effectively address complex and multi-system vulnerabilities, like those commonly present in older adults undergoing cardiac surgery. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have the potential to improve delivery and patient experience with ERPs, but their development in the academic research setting is often limited by a lack of end-user (e.g., i.e., patient and caregiver) involvement.What does this study add?To our knowledge, this is one of the first studies to engage patients and caregivers in the development of a mHealth technology that supports ERPs for cardiac surgery. This study describes a process for engaging patients and caregivers as “co-producers” of a mHealth technology to support delivery of ERPs during the perioperative period of cardiac surgery. It also demonstrates that engaging patients and caregivers in research, through the formation of an advisory panel, yields a rich source of information to guide the design and content of mHealth technologies in cardiac research.How might this impact on clinical practice?In an era in which mHealth technologies are being increasingly looked to for the optimization of healthcare delivery, this study underscores the utility of using patient and caregiver voices to drive the development of patient-centered mHealth technologies to support clinical practice.

The importance and value of engaging patients and the public as co-researchers (i.e., “patient engagement in research”) is becoming more evident, and guiding methods must be available for researchers conducting their work at different points along the engagement spectrum. This article provides a virtual workshop model for integrating patient and public stakeholder perspectives in data analysis and interpretation. The model is based upon a critical reflection on the methods that underlaid the consultation stage of our scoping review on patient and caregiver preferences for cardiac surgery. It involves four virtual workshop sessions held on separate days, each achieving the unique goals of (a) establishing participants’ technological literacy within the virtual platform, (b) obtaining responses to the research question, (c) introducing participant perspectives into research analysis and interpretation, and (d) prioritizing research findings or future research agendas. Further, a description of the considerations related to virtual engagement, including those pertaining to equity, diversity, and inclusion; features of the virtual platform; and roles for the research team are provided. This paper contributes toward a methodological toolkit for patient engagement in research, especially as an adjunct to research with otherwise minimal patient engagement. It also adds to the emerging literature on practical approaches to patient engagement in research as more engagement is occurring virtually.