Search

Background: Globally, it is estimated that one in three adults live with two or more long‐term conditions (multiple long‐term conditions, MLTCs), that require self‐management. People who experience socioeconomic deprivation face significant health inequalities due to a range of interrelated characteristics that lead to a lack of resources and opportunities. Previous research with underserved populations indicate low levels of trust towards primary care providers and potential barriers for developing patient‐healthcare professional relationships. The purpose of this paper is to explore the barriers and facilitators to self‐managing MLTCs, amongst people who experience socioeconomic deprivation. Methods: Semistructured one‐to‐one interviews with adults (n = 28) living in London and Sheffield, United Kingdom with MLTCs who are experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Participants were recruited through general practices, community channels and social media. Data were analysed in NVivo using reflexive thematic analysis methods. Findings: Four analytical themes were developed: (1) challenges in accessing healthcare services, financial assistance, and cultural awareness; (2) empowerment and disempowerment through technology, including digital exclusion, and use of technology; (3) impact and causes of exclusion on self‐management, including social isolation, area‐based and economic exclusion, and health‐related stigma and (4) adapting self‐management strategies, including cost‐effective, and culturally/lifestyle appropriate strategies. Conclusions: Future health interventions and services need to be developed with consideration of the combined complexities of managing MLTCs while experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Increased awareness in practitioners and commissioners of the complexities surrounding the lives of people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation, and the need for targeted strategies to promote self‐management of MLTCs are of great importance. Patient or Public Contribution: A patient advisory group contributed to all stages of the study, including providing important feedback on study documents (topic guides and recruitment materials), as well as providing critical insights surrounding the interpretation of interview data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper aims to explore the impact of recovery education on recovery knowledge, attitudes and the quality of life of students undertaking recovery education, contributing to the evidence base in relation to the impact of recovery education. It also explores the experiences of all stakeholders involved in the co‐facilitation, delivery and participation in recovery education. Setting and Participants: This study evaluates the experiences of stakeholders involved in the co‐facilitation, delivery and participation in recovery education across four recovery colleges in Ireland. Participants included students undertaking recovery education, peer educators, education facilitators, recovery college coordinators and practitioner/service providers. Discussion: Findings from the quantitative survey when compared with extant literature suggest that students had a good understanding of recovery education. The social aspect of empowerment for growth and wellbeing was identified through themes relating to co‐production and facilitating student learning. Support for equitable access to recovery education, including co‐production for both the public and staff, was identified as a challenge for the future. Conclusion: The findings from both the qualitative and quantitative components of the study show the positive impact of recovery education on stakeholders while acknowledging the need for ongoing support for people working in recovery education and the development of services. In particular, there was a high level of recovery knowledge found in students undertaking recovery education. Patient or Public Contribution: This study utilised a co‐created study design. From inception a steering group comprising stakeholders (peer educators, recovery education facilitators including past recovery college students and nonpeer staff involved in the co‐production of recovery education) directed the conduct of the evaluation. This steering group participated in an iterative process of information sharing, suggestions for evaluation process and language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The implementation science literature acknowledges a need for engagement of key stakeholders when designing, delivering and evaluating implementation work. To date, the literature reports minimal or focused stakeholder engagement, where stakeholders are engaged in either barrier identification and/or barrier prioritisation. This paper begins to answer calls from the literature for the development of tools and guidance to support comprehensive stakeholder engagement in implementation research and practice. The paper describes the systematic development of the Implementation‐STakeholder Engagement Model (I‐STEM) in the context of an international, large‐scale empirical implementation study (ImpleMentAll) aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored implementation toolkit. The I‐STEM is a sensitising tool that defines key considerations and activities for undertaking stakeholder engagement activities across an implementation process. Methods: In‐depth, semistructured interviews and observations were conducted with implementers who were tailoring implementation strategies to integrate and embed internet‐based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) services in 12 routine mental health care organisations in nine countries in Europe and Australia. The analytical process was informed by principles of first‐ and third‐generation Grounded Theory, including constant comparative method. Results: We conducted 55 interviews and observed 19 implementation‐related activities (e.g., team meetings and technical support calls). The final outcome of our analysis is expressed in an initial version of the I‐STEM, consisting of five interrelated concepts: engagement objectives, stakeholder mapping, engagement approaches, engagement qualities and engagement outcomes. Engagement objectives are goals that implementers plan to achieve by working with stakeholders in the implementation process. Stakeholder mapping involves identifying a range of organisations, groups or people who may be instrumental in achieving the engagement objectives. Engagement approaches define the type of work that is undertaken with stakeholders to achieve the engagement objectives. Engagement qualities define the logistics of the engagement approach. Lastly, every engagement activity may result in a range of engagement outcomes. Conclusion: The I‐STEM represents potential avenues for substantial stakeholder engagement activity across key phases of an implementation process. It provides a conceptual model for the planning, delivery, evaluation and reporting of stakeholder engagement activities. The I‐STEM is nonprescriptive and highlights the importance of a flexible, iterative approach to stakeholder engagement. It is developmental and will require application and validation across a range of implementation activities. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient contribution to ImpleMentAll trial was facilitated by GAMIAN‐Europe at all stages—from grant development to dissemination. GAMIAN‐Europe brings together a wide variety of patient representation organisations (local, regional and national) from almost all European countries. GAMIAN‐Europe was involved in pilot testing the ItFits‐toolkit and provided their views on the various aspects, including stakeholder engagement. Patients were also represented in the external advisory board providing support and advice on the design, conduct and interpretation of the wider project, including the development of the ItFits‐toolkit. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883. Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Too often, dementia research is conducted in research silos without thorough integration and the involvement of people with lived experiences, care professionals and the Third Sector. Research can also get lost in academic publications, without reaching those benefiting most from the evidence. The aim of this methods and evaluation paper was to outline the aims, components and evaluation of the public‐facing and ‐engaging Liverpool Dementia & Ageing Research Forum, to provide a blueprint for setting up similar communities of practice. Methods: The Forum was set up in 2019 with the aim to (a) connect different stakeholders in dementia and ageing and co‐produce research and to (b) inform and educate. This paper provides an account of the Forum model and evaluates the following key elements: (1) engagement; (2) experiences of the Forum and its impact (via an online evaluation survey and three reflections). All Forum members and attendees were asked to complete a brief evaluation survey about their experiences from October to November 2022. Three regular Forum attendees provided a case study about their involvement and its impact. Findings: The Forum has reached out to diverse stakeholders and the general public, generating growing interest and engagement since its initiation. Forty‐four members and attendees completed the survey. Most attendees completing the evaluation survey have so far engaged in between 5 and 20 activities (47.8%), and 91% felt the aims of the Forum have been met. Engaging in the Forum has produced various benefits for attendees, including increased research capacity and knowledge, as well as improved connectivity with other stakeholders. Eleven percent of respondents, 39% of lived experts, stated they experienced improved access to postdiagnostic care. Conclusions: This is the first reported multistakeholder Community of Practice (CoP) on dementia and ageing. We make key recommendations for setting up and running similar dementia CoP, as they provide a noninterventional format for raising awareness, capacity and access to dementia care. Patient and Public Involvement: This paper reports on the involvement and engagement of people with dementia, unpaid carers, health and social care providers and Third Sector organisations in a CoP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with Parkinson's disease (PD) do not always access specialist outpatient services in a timely manner in Ireland. The perspectives of people living with PD, relating to service access, are largely absent in the existing literature. Aim: To explore experiences of PD service access for people living with PD, using a qualitative approach. Methods: Purposive maximum variation sampling was used. Semi‐structured telephone interviews were conducted with 25 service users, including people with PD (n = 22) and supporting carers (n = 3). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Interviews ranged in duration from 30 to 90 min. Data were managed in NVivo 12 and interpreted inductively using thematic analysis. The researchers were reflexive throughout the research process. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist was employed to maximise transparency. Results: The findings highlight several key barriers to and facilitators of equitable and timely service access. Three key themes were identified comprising experiences of PD service access including 'geographical inequity', 'discriminatory practices', and 'public and private system deficits'. Together, these themes illustrate how a two‐tiered and under‐resourced health system lacks capacity, in terms of infrastructure and workforce, to meet PD needs for both public and private patients in Ireland. Conclusions: These findings point to problems for PD care, relating to (i) how the health system is structured, (ii) the under‐provision and under‐resourcing of specialist outpatient PD services, including medical, nursing, and multidisciplinary posts, and (iii) insufficient PD awareness education and training across health settings. The findings also show that telemedicine can provide opportunities for making access to certain aspects of PD care more flexible and equitable, but the feasibility and acceptability of technology‐enabled care must be assessed on an individual basis. Implications for policy, practice and research are discussed. Patient or Public Contribution: The design and conduct of this study were supported by an expert advisory group (EAG) of 10 co‐researchers living with PD. The EAG reviewed the interview schedule and the protocol for this study and provided detailed feedback from their perspective, to improve the methods, including the interview approach. The group also reviewed the findings of the study and contributed their insights on the meaning of the findings, which fed into this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite increasing support for stakeholder inclusion in research, there is limited evaluative research to guide safe (i.e., youth‐friendly) and meaningful (i.e., non‐tokenistic) partnerships with young people with lived experience of mental ill‐health in research. This paper describes a pilot evaluation and iterative design of a Youth Lived Experience Working Group (LEWG) protocol that was established by the Youth Mental Health and Technology team at The University of Sydney's Brain and Mind Centre, based on the results of two studies. Methods: Study one consisted of a pilot evaluation of the extent to which youth partners felt empowered to contribute, to qualitatively explore how LEWG processes could be improved. Youth partners completed online surveys, and results were shared over two LEWG meetings in 2021 to empower youth partners to collectively identify actions of positive change regarding LEWG processes. These meetings were audio‐recorded and transcripts were subsequently coded using thematic analysis. Study two assessed whether LEWG processes and proposed improvements were acceptable and feasible from the perspective of academic researchers via an online survey in 2022. Results: Quantitative and qualitative data collected from nine youth partners and 42 academic researchers uncovered initial learnings regarding facilitators, motivators, and barriers to partnering with young people with lived experience in research. Implementing clear processes for youth partners and academic researchers on effective partnership strategies, providing training opportunities for youth partners to develop research skills, and providing regular updates on how youth partner contributions led to research outcomes were identified as key facilitators. Conclusions: This pilot study provides insight into a growing international field on how to optimise participatory processes so that researchers and young people with lived experience can be better supported and engaged to make meaningful contributions to mental health research. We argue that more transparency is needed around participatory research processes so that partnerships with young people with lived experience are not merely tokenistic. Consumer Contributions: Our study has also been approved by and reflects the concepts and priorities of our youth lived experience partners and lived experience researchers, all of whom are authors of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow‐up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two‐way information sharing and clear follow‐up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted pre‐ and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed. Results: Thirty‐two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow‐up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer‐specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low‐risk, stable patients around 2–3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow‐up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported. Conclusion: Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow‐up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Big data research requires public support. It has been argued that this can be achieved by public involvement and engagement to ensure that public views are at the centre of research projects. Researchers should aim to include diverse communities, including seldom‐heard voices, to ensure that a range of voices are heard and that research is meaningful to them. Objective: We explored how researchers involve and engage seldom‐heard communities around big data research. Methods: This is a qualitative study. Researchers who had experience of involving or engaging seldom‐heard communities in big data research were recruited. They were based in England (n = 5), Scotland (n = 4), Belgium (n = 2) and Canada (n = 1). Twelve semistructured interviews were conducted on Zoom. All interviews were audio‐recorded and transcribed, and we used reflexive thematic analysis to analyse participants' experiences. Results: The analysis highlighted the complexity of involving and engaging seldom‐heard communities around big data research. Four themes were developed to represent participants' experiences: (1) abstraction and complexity of big data, (2) one size does not fit all, (3) working in partnership and (4) empowering the public contribution. Conclusion: The study offers researchers a better understanding of how to involve and engage seldom‐heard communities in a meaningful way around big data research. There is no one right approach, with involvement and engagement activities required to be project‐specific and dependent on the public contributors, researchers' needs, resources and time available. Patient and Public Involvement: Two public contributors are authors of the paper and they were involved in the study design, analysis and writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Involving patients is a key premise of national and international policies on patient safety, which requires understanding how patients or carers want to be involved and developing resources to support this. This paper examines patients' and carers' views of being involved in patient safety in primary care and their views of potentially using a co‐designed patient safety guide for primary care (PSG‐PC) to foster both involvement and their safety. Methods: A qualitative study using semistructured face‐to‐face interviews with 18 patients and/or carers in primary care. Interviews were transcribed and analysis was conducted using an inductive thematic approach. Results: Overall participants expressed enthusiasm for the PSG‐PC as a tool to support patients and carers to be involved in patient safety in primary care. However, for some participants being involved in patient safety was seen as taking on the role of General Practitioner and had the potential to add an additional workload for patients. Participants' willingness or ability to be involved in patient safety was influenced by a range of factors including an invisible, often underacknowledged role of everyday safety for patients' interactions with primary care; the levels of involvement that patients wanted in their care and safety and the work of embedding the PSG‐PC for patients into their routine interactions with primary care. Participants identified components of the PSG‐PC that would be useful to them, in particular, if they had a responsibility for caring for a family member if they had more complex care or long‐term conditions. Conclusion: Involving patients and carers in patient safety needs a tailored and personalized approach that enables patients and carers to use resources like the PSG‐PC routinely and helps challenge assumptions about their willingness and ability to be involved in patient safety. Doing so would raise awareness of opportunities to be involved in safety in line with personal preference. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and public involvement were central to the research study. This included working in partnership to develop the PSG‐PC with patients and carers and throughout our study including in the design of the study, recruiting participants, interpretation of findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID‐19 pandemic has had an impact on all aspects of the health system. Little is known about how the activities and experiences of patient, family and caregiver partners, as a large group across a variety of settings within the health system, changed due to the substantial health system shifts catalysed by the pandemic. This paper reports on the results of a survey that included questions about this topic. Methods: Canadian patient, family and caregiver partners were invited to participate in an online anonymous survey in the Fall of 2020. A virtual snowballing approach to recruitment was used. Survey invitations were shared on social media and emailed to health system and governmental organizations with the request that they share the survey with patient partners. This paper focuses on responses to two questions related to patient partner experiences during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Results: The COVID‐19 questions were completed by 533 respondents. Over three quarters of respondents (77.9%, n = 415) indicated their patient engagement activities had been impacted by COVID‐19. The majority (62.5%, n = 230) experienced at least a temporary or partial reduction in their patient engagement activities. Some respondents did see increases in their patient engagement activities (11.4%, n = 42). Many respondents provided insights into their experience with virtual platforms for engagement (n = 194), most expressed negative or mixed experiences with this shift. Conclusions: This study provides a snapshot of Canadian patient, family and caregiver partners' perspectives on the impact of COVID‐19 on their engagement activities. Understanding how engagement unfolded during a crisis is critical for our future planning if patient engagement is to be fully integrated into the health system. Identifying how patient partners were engaged and not engaged during this time period, as well as the benefits and challenges of virtual engagement opportunities, offers instructive lessons for sustaining patient engagement, including the supports needed to engage with a more diverse set of patient, family and caregiver partners. Patient Contribution: Patient partners were important members of the Canadian Patient Partner Study research team. They were engaged from the outset, participating in all stages of the research project. Additional patient partners were engaged to develop and pilot test the survey, and all survey respondents were patient, family or caregiver partners. The manuscript is coauthored by two patient partners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Health literacy (HL) refers to individuals' abilities to process and use health information to promote health. This study aimed to develop the first HL measurement tool for the Chinese Hong Kong population. Methods: A two‐phase methodology was adopted. In Phase I, evidence synthesis with a deductive method was conducted to formulate the item list from the literature. In Phase II, a modified e‐Delphi survey was conducted among stakeholders (i.e., healthcare providers and healthcare consumers) to confirm the content validity of the item list. The stakeholders were invited to rate the relevance of each draft item on a 4‐point scale and provide suggestions for revisions, removal or adding new items. Results: In Phase I, a total of 34 items covering functional, interactive and critical HL were generated. In Phase II, to obtain a balanced view from experts and laypeople, healthcare professionals (n = 12) and consumers (n = 12) were invited to participate in the Delphi panel. The response rates of the three rounds were 100%. After the third round, the consensus was reached for 31 items, and no further comments for adding or revising items were received. All items exhibited excellent content validity (item content validity index: 0.79–1.00; K*: 0.74–1.00). Conclusions: A Health Literacy Scale for Hong Kong was developed. Compared with existing HL scales, the scale fully operationalized the skills involved in functional, interactive and critical HL. The Delphi study shows evidence supporting the high content validity of all items in the scale. In future studies, these items should undergo rigorous testing to examine their psychometric properties in our target population groups. By illuminating the details in the development process, this paper provides a deeper understanding of the scale's scope and limitations for others who are interested in using this tool. Patient or Public Contribution: Public as healthcare consumers, in addition to healthcare providers, were involved in developing a new HL scale for this study. The input from the public contributed to examining the scale's content validity by judging whether all items reflected the skills that they need to find and use health‐related information in their daily life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A person‐centred model of care, developed in the early days of the HIV epidemic when there were no effective treatments for HIV, led to relatively close relationships between carers and people living with HIV (PLWH). Our study examines the experiences of carers using a relational framework, exploring the traumas and challenges involved, coping practices instigated by carers and the emergence of 'relational traumatic growth' opportunities. Methods: Twenty‐two UK healthcare workers and charity volunteers working with PLWH from the early years of the epidemic were recruited. Semistructured interviews were used to elicit participants' own stories of working with PLWH, from their initial involvement to the present time, and their reflections on the personal impact of working in the field of HIV. Data were analysed using a thematic approach employing relational categories. Results: The impact of care was related to the formation of close relationships, identification with PLWH, high numbers of deaths and the difficulties and challenges encountered relationally. Participants described attempts to cope through informal and formal support, as well as endeavours to manage professional boundaries. Various ways of making sense of experiences were described, ranging from denial to abandoning the HIV field, to intense commitment. For some, traumatic experiences lead to validation, a search for personal meaning and managing the sense of loss with an exploration of further ventures, contributing to the achievement of relational traumatic growth. Conclusion: The intensity of relationships in HIV work, developed through the emotional and practical work of caring for PLWH, led healthcare workers and volunteers to experience a range of psychological consequences, both negative (including distress and emotional exhaustion) and also positive (such as acquiring a sense of purpose). Patient or Public Contribution: People living with HIV and those working with them were involved in the initial study conceptualization and design. The second and fourth authors of this paper were professionals working in HIV throughout the pandemic and have led on all aspects of the study. People living with HIV and those working with them additionally guided participant selection by suggesting participants and supporting recruitment. Narrative transcripts were checked and amended (if necessary) by participants. Initial findings were presented at the AIDS impact conference, where PLWH and those working with them attended and feedback on important ideas that helped to prioritize and shape the study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Shared decision‐making has been shown to improve the quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients in high‐literacy and high‐resource settings. However, limited studies have examined the cultural preferences of metastatic breast cancer patients with shared decision‐making implementation and the barriers encountered in an Asian setting where societal norms predominate and physician decision‐making is at the forefront. This paper aims to identify (1) barriers to practising shared decision‐making faced by healthcare professionals and patients and (2) strategies for implementing shared decision‐making in the context of metastatic breast cancer management in Malaysia. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study involving 12 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, 16 healthcare professionals and 5 policymakers from surgical and oncology departments at public healthcare centres in Malaysia. Semi‐structured in‐depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic approach. Nvivo software was used to manage and analyse the data. Results: Five main themes emerged from the study: healthcare provider–patient communication, workforce availability, cultural and belief systems, goals of care and paternalism versus autonomy. Other strategies proposed to overcome barriers to implementing shared decision‐making were training of healthcare professionals and empowering nurses to manage patients' psychosocial issues. Conclusion: This study found that practising shared decision‐making in the public health sector remains challenging when managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. The utilization of decision‐making tools, patient empowerment and healthcare provider training may help address the system and healthcare provider–patient barriers identified in this study. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients were involved in the study design, recruitment and analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite digital health tools being popular for supporting self‐management of chronic diseases, little research has been undertaken on stroke. We developed and pilot tested, using a randomized controlled design, a multicomponent digital health programme, known as Inspiring Virtual Enabled Resources following Vascular Events (iVERVE), to improve self‐management after stroke. The 4‐week trial incorporated facilitated person‐centred goal setting, with those in the intervention group receiving electronic messages aligned to their goals, versus limited administrative messages for the control group. In this paper, we describe the participant experience of the various components involved with the iVERVE trial. Methods: Mixed method design: satisfaction surveys (control and intervention) and a focus group interview (purposively selected intervention participants). Experiences relating to goal setting and overall trial satisfaction were obtained from intervention and control participants, with feedback on the electronic message component from intervention participants. Inductive thematic analysis was used for interview data and open‐text responses, and closed questions were summarized descriptively. Triangulation of data allowed participants' perceptions to be explored in depth. Results: Overall, 27/54 trial participants completed the survey (13 intervention: 52%; 14 control: 48%); and 5/8 invited participants in the intervention group attended the focus group. Goal setting: The approach was considered comprehensive, with the involvement of health professionals in the process helpful in developing realistic, meaningful and person‐centred goals. Electronic messages (intervention): Messages were perceived as easy to understand (92%), and the frequency of receipt was considered appropriate (11/13 survey; 4/5 focus group). The content of messages was considered motivational (62%) and assisted participants to achieve their goals (77%). Some participants described the benefits of receiving messages as a 'reminder' to act. Overall trial satisfaction: Messages were acceptable for educating about stroke (77%). Having options for short message services or email to receive messages was considered important. Feedback on the length of the intervention related to specific goals, and benefits of receiving the programme earlier after stroke was expressed. Conclusion: The participant experience has indicated acceptance and utility of iVERVE. Feedback from this evaluation is invaluable to inform refinements to future Phase II and III trials, and wider research in the field. Patient or Public Contribution: Two consumer representatives sourced from the Stroke Foundation (Australia) actively contributed to the design of the iVERVE programme. In this study, participant experiences directly contributed to the further development of the iVERVE intervention and future trial design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: British South Asians have a higher prevalence of overweight and obesity than the wider population. Bradford (UK), with its high Pakistani presence and levels of economic deprivation, has exceptionally high instances, especially in deprived areas where many Pakistanis reside. British Pakistani women in Bradford are more likely to be overweight and obese. There is uncertainty on how these women can be aided to manage their weight. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore the obesity concerns of Pakistani women living in deprived inner‐city areas of Bradford. Methods: Three focus groups interviews were carried out with 23 Pakistani women living in deprived areas of Bradford. Data were analysed thematically. Results: This exploratory study identified a wide range of concerns that women had around managing their weight. Participants disclosed distrust in information given around medication, conflicting dietary information and reported low levels of trust in women‐only organized physical activities. Cultural barriers were identified, which included the gender role of the woman, the lack of culturally appropriate dietary advice, cultural misunderstandings of what constitutes a healthy diet and healthy weight, the lack of culturally suitable exercise facilities and conforming to family and community expectations. Other concerns were language barriers around a lack of understanding, the inability to read Urdu and reliance on others to translate information. Conclusion: These findings have implications for researchers, local authorities, policy makers and others with an interest in reducing the rates of obesity in this population. Recommendations include training health practitioners to be culturally aware of the diet and eating practices of this community, exploring different ways to support socially isolated women to be more physically active at home, addressing physical activity and diet misconceptions and designing obesity management information materials appropriate for a range of literacy levels. Patient or Public Contribution: Public contributors were involved in the development of the interview guide and design of the research. A pilot focus group with participants not included in the present paper was used to help test and refine the focus group questions. Interview transcripts were member checked by participants, and participants assisted with data analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background & Objective: Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is the term used for a group of genetic skin fragility disorders. For those living with EB, pain represents a constant challenge, with blistering and tasks such as changing dressings, adding to the distress. This paper focuses on describing and exploring the health‐care needs of children, adults and families who are affected by EB. The specific aim of the paper is to identify the needs of the EB population with a view towards informing the development of a community liaison service to support adults living with EB and the parents/carers of children living with EB. Setting and Participants: Interviews with six adults and the parents of eight children with EB were conducted. The data were analysed thematically. All participants were resident on the island of Ireland and are therefore reflecting on services in this geographic region. Results: Participants' needs were grouped into five themes: support managing physical health‐care issues; access to community/home‐based services; EB‐specific information and psychosocial support; effective interaction with health‐care professionals; and advice regarding benefits and entitlements. Discussion and Conclusions: This article represents the health‐care needs and preferences of a broad spectrum of those with EB, highlighting the need for a comprehensive service regardless of the severity of the condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Trans‐identifying individuals experience unique barriers and challenges in negotiating health‐care systems due to the cisnormative attitudes and practices which obstruct the receipt of trans‐inclusive care. To date, there has been little exploration of older trans consumers' experiences of contemporary health‐care services when seeking to transition medically in later life. Objectives: Qualitative findings are presented from a study of trans ageing and trans‐related health and social care needs in Wales, UK (2016‐18). The objectives are to (1) examine supportive and obstructive points of interaction with health‐care professionals, and (2) identify key learning messages for improving trans‐related health care from the perspectives of trans‐identifying adults in later life. Design: Trans‐identifying participants self‐selected to take part in two interviews—a life‐history interview and a semi‐structured interview. Interview data were analysed thematically using the framework method approach. Setting and participants: This paper focuses on the accounts of 19 participants (50‐74 years of age) who identified as trans and were seeking to transition medically in mid‐ to later life. Results: Findings indicate how older trans patients are positioned as reluctant educators for GPs in primary care settings and illustrate the transphobic practices and cisnormative assumptions encountered across health‐care interactions and systems that impede their journey of transitioning in later life. Discussion and conclusions: Messages from this study speak to the importance of improving professionals' knowledge of gender identity diversity across the life course and making changes at a systemic level in redressing cisnormative assumptions and systems that reinforce inequities on the basis of gender identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Opioids are one of the most prescribed treatments for chronic pain (CP). However, their long‐term use (>3 months) has been surrounded by controversy, due to loss of beneficial effects. Objective: To explore the experiences of people with chronic non‐malignant low back pain in Spain undergoing long‐term treatment with opioids. Design: Qualitative study. Setting and participants: We conducted 15 semi‐structured interviews at the Pain Clinic with persons taking opioid treatment. Methods: The interviews were analysed by qualitative content analysis as described by Graneheim and Lundman, and developed categories and themes discussed in light of a biomedicalization framework. Main results: We developed one overarching theme—Living with opioids: dependence and autonomy while seeking relief—and three categories: The long pathway to opioids due to the invisibility of pain; Opioids: from blind date to a long‐term relationship; and What opioids cannot fix. Discussion: The long and difficult road to find effective treatments was a fundamental part of coping with pain, involving long‐term relationships with the health system. This study reflects the benefits, and drawbacks of opioids, along with struggles to maintain autonomy and make decisions while undergoing long‐term treatment with opioids. The paper also highlights the consequences of pain in the economy, family and social life of patients. Conclusions: Patients' experiences should be considered to a greater extent by health‐care professionals when giving information about opioids and setting treatment goals. Greater consideration of the social determinants of health that affect CP experiences might lead to more effective solutions to CP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and context: Breastfeeding peer support is valued by women, but UK trials have not demonstrated efficacy. The ABA feasibility trial offered proactive peer support underpinned by behaviour change theory and an assets‐based approach to women having their first baby, regardless of feeding intention. This paper explores women's and infant feeding helpers' (IFHs) views of the different components of the ABA intervention. Setting and participants: Trained IFHs offered 50 women an antenatal meeting to discuss infant feeding and identify community assets in two English sites—one with a paid peer support service and the other volunteer‐led. Postnatally, daily contact was offered for the first 2 weeks, followed by less frequent contact until 5 months. Methods: Interviews with 21 women and focus groups/interviews with 13 IFHs were analysed using thematic and framework methods. Results: Five themes are reported highlighting that women talked positively about the antenatal meeting, mapping their network of support, receiving proactive contact from their IFH, keeping in touch using text messaging and access to local groups. The face‐to‐face antenatal visit facilitated regular text‐based communication both in pregnancy and in the early weeks after birth. Volunteer IFHs were supportive of and enthusiastic about the intervention, whereas some of the paid IFHs disliked some intervention components and struggled with the distances to travel to participants. Conclusions: This proactive community assets‐based approach with a woman‐centred focus was acceptable to women and IFHs and is a promising intervention warranting further research as to its effect on infant feeding outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Longitudinal cohort studies gather large amounts of data over time, often without direct benefit to participants. A positive experience may encourage retention in the study, and participants may benefit in unanticipated ways. Objective: To explore first‐time mothers' experiences of taking part in a longitudinal cohort study and completing self‐administered surveys during pregnancy and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months' postpartum. Design: Content analysis of comments written by participants in the Maternal health And Maternal Morbidity in Ireland study's five self‐completion surveys, a multisite cohort study exploring women's health and health problems during and after pregnancy. This paper focuses on what women wrote about taking part in the research. Ethical approval was granted by the site hospitals and university. Setting and participants: A total of 2174 women were recruited from two maternity hospitals in Ireland between 2012 and 2015. Findings: A total of 1000 comments were made in the five surveys. Antenatally, barriers related to surveys being long and questions being intimate. Postpartum, barriers related to being busy with life as first‐time mothers. Benefits gained included gaining access to information, taking time to reflect, stopping to think and being prompted to seek help. Survey questions alone were described as valuable sources of information. Discussion and conclusions: Findings suggest that survey research can "give back" to women by being a source of information and a trigger to seek professional help, even while asking sensitive questions. Understanding this can help researchers construct surveys to maximize benefits, real and potential, for participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Patients are increasingly offered electronic access to their doctors' notes, and many consistently receive paper After‐Visit Summaries. Specific feedback from patients about notes and summaries are lacking, particularly within safety‐net settings. Design: A mixed methods study Setting and Participants: Patients with poorly controlled diabetes attending two urban safety‐net primary care clinics in Washington State. Methods: Patients read their own most recent clinic note and After‐Visit Summary, then completed a brief survey followed by a focus group discussion (3 groups in a large general medicine teaching clinic and 1 in an HIV/AIDS clinic) about their perceptions of the clinic note and After‐Visit Summary. Results: Twenty‐seven patients participated; 70% were male, 41% were Black, 48% were unemployed or disabled, 56% reported fair/poor health, and 37% had accessed the electronic patient portal. A majority of patients felt their note content was useful (89%); a minority reported that their notes were not accurate (19%), had too much medical jargon (29%), or were too long (26%). Themes identified from the discussions included reliance on the provider to explain confusing content; a desire for more rather than less detail; and perceived inaccuracies, particularly in heavily templated notes. In each focus group, one or more portal users were enthusiastically willing to teach other patients. Conclusions: The majority of focus group participants at this safety‐net site had not accessed the electronic patient portal, but those who had were willing to promote the portal benefits and assist others. Patients identified specific opportunities to improve clinic notes and After‐Visit Summaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ( NICE) has an explicit mandate to include patient and public involvement in the appraisal of medicines to be available for funding on the NHS. NICE involves an appraisal committee who are required to take on board experiential evidence from patient experts alongside population-based evidence on clinical and cost-effectiveness when making a decision whether to fund a drug. Objective This paper considers how NICE Single Technological Appraisal ( STA) committees attempt to incorporate the views of patients in making decisions about funding medicines on the NHS. Methods A prospective design was employed to follow three pharmaceutical products involving three different appraisal committees. Three data collection methods were used: analysis of documentary evidence sent by NICE, non-participant unstructured observations of the open and closed sessions of meetings and qualitative interviews. Settings and participants Unstructured non-participant observations were carried out at nine STA meetings, and 41 semi-structured interviews were undertaken with committee members from NICE's STA committees, patient experts, analysts from NICE's project team and drug manufacturers. Results Our analysis showed how the committees displayed a preference for an ideal-type of patient representative, disagreement among the committee when weighing-up patient statements in the STA process and more pre-preparation support for patient involvement. Conclusions Although NICE has attempted to adopt an approach flexible to patients and carers through formal decision-making arrangements that incorporate patient views, nonetheless, the processes of the STAs can in fact undermine the very evidence collected from patient representatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The importance of involving patients in reporting on safety is increasingly recognized. Whilst studies have identified barriers to clinician incident reporting, few have explored barriers and facilitators to patient reporting of safety experiences. This paper explores patient perspectives on providing feedback on safety experiences. Design/Participants Patients (n=28) were invited to take part in semi-structured interviews when given a survey about their experiences of safety following hospital discharge. Transcripts were thematically analysed using NVivo10. Setting Patients were recruited from four hospitals in the UK. Results Three themes were identified as barriers and facilitators to patient involvement in providing feedback on their safety experiences. The first, cognitive-cultural, found that whilst safety was a priority for most, some felt the term was not relevant to them because safety was the 'default' position, and/or because safety could not be disentangled from the overall experience of care. The structural-procedural theme indicated that reporting was facilitated when patients saw the process as straightforward, but that disinclination or perceived inability to provide feedback was a barrier. Finally, learning and change illustrated that perception of the impact of feedback could facilitate or inhibit reporting. Conclusions When collecting patient feedback on experiences of safety, it is important to consider what may help or hinder this process, beyond the process alone. We present a staged model of prerequisite barriers and facilitators and hypothesize that each stage needs to be achieved for patients to provide feedback on safety experiences. Implications for collecting meaningful data on patients' safety experiences are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]