Search

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: Engaging with the public is a key element of health research; however, little work has examined experiences of public involvement in research dissemination. The aim of this paper was to assess the extent of public involvement, experiences of public advisers and resulting changes in the dissemination of the North West Coast Household Health Survey (HHS). Methods: Three writing groups allowed public advisers to contribute to the dissemination of the HHS. A public workshop was set up to aid the co‐production of the research evidence and discuss the experiences of public advisers involved with the survey in March 2018. A focus group with public advisers was conducted in August 2018 to understand their experiences of involvement. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and coded by two researchers. Writing groups are still on‐going. Results: Fourteen public advisers contributed via three face‐to‐face writing groups, by actively interpreting findings and helping in the write‐up of research articles and by presenting talks at the public workshop. At the workshop, seven public advisors contributed to setting priorities for data analysis from the HHS. Five public advisers took part in the focus group, which highlighted that whilst public advisers were generally satisfied with their involvement, they would like to be involved in more activities. Conclusions: Members of the public shaped the dissemination of evidence and provided guidance for future steps. Public advisers were mostly positive about their involvement in the dissemination of the HHS, but highlighted the need for more transparency and support from researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A new diagnosis of complex post‐traumatic stress disorder, CPTSD, has been agreed by the World Health Organization, WHO, and evidence is needed for what psychological treatment might be effective, particularly from those with experience of the disorder. We used a novel participatory approach to explore patient views and simultaneously studied the impact on the patient researchers of the research process itself. In this paper, we report on the latter section of the study how the involvement in research of patients with CPTSD affected their mental health. Symptoms of CPTSD may include emotional dysregulation, feelings of self‐worthlessness and difficulties in relationships. Objective: The aim of this study section was to explore whether patients' mental health could be promoted through empowering them to participate in research on CPTSD. Design: The study had a qualitative, participatory design. The clinician who led the research (first author) held group meetings with patient researchers to explore the impact of the research process. The clinician also kept notes on the process in a reflective log. Setting and participants: Six patient researchers participated in research with other patients with lived experience of CPTSD in an NHS outpatient unit in a London hospital. Intervention studied: The research process itself was analysed in group meetings with researchers which the clinician recorded and transcribed. Findings: Participation in research may promote increased self‐confidence and social inclusion for those with CPTSD. Conclusion: Involvement in research may be seen as an empowering intervention because patients felt it contributed to recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To explore the experiences, acceptability and utility of a decision aid for family carers of people with dementia towards the end of life. Methods: We conducted semi‐structured interviews with a sample of family carers enroled into a 6‐month feasibility study in England, sampling to gain a range of experiences and views, based on relationship to person they cared for (e.g., spouse, adult child), age, gender, and self‐reported use of the decision aid during the feasibility study. Interviews were conducted in March 2021–July 2021 and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. We used COREQ checklist to report our methods and results. Results: Family carers found the decision aid acceptable, describing it as comprehensive, accessible with relevant information and its presentation enabled good engagement. Experiences of the decision aid covered four main themes which demonstrated the perceived acceptability and utility: 1. A source of support and reassurance; 2. Empowering conversations and confidence; 3. Including the person living with dementia; and 4. Breaking down complexity. Conclusions: An aid focussing on decisions about dementia end of life care supported family carers break down complex and emotive decisions, not only with making decisions in the moment but also in future planning. Patient or Public Contribution: Our three Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) members (all former family carers) were crucial throughout the wider study. PPI supported development of the topic guides, supported trialling the topic guide and interview procedures and finally supported the development of themes as part of the analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Disability is often an essentialised and oversimplified concept. We propose refining this while incorporating the multidimensional nature of disability by increasing the use of existing survey questions and their corresponding data to enrich, broaden and inform understandings of disability. Methods: We combined patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) with focus groups and concept mapping to collaboratively map disability survey questions into conceptual models of disability with six members of the public with lived experiences of disability. Results: Using reflexive thematic analysis, we identified three qualitative themes and eight subthemes through a series of four PPIE activities: (1) understanding concepts of disability based on individual experience, subthemes: 1.1—preference for the biopsychosocial model, 1.2—'Reviewing' instead of mapping survey questions and 1.3—comparing questions to real life; (2) consistency between understanding needs and implementing adjustments, subthemes: 2.1—connecting preparation and operation, 2.2—inclusivity and adjustments in activities and 2.3—feedback for improving activities and (3) real‐world applications—targeted awareness raising, subthemes: 3.1—who, where, what and how to share activity findings and results, 3.2—sharing with human resource and equality, diversity and inclusion professionals. Conclusion: Members of the public who collaborated in these activities felt empowered, engaged and supported throughout this study. This approach offers a model for other researchers to cede power to the public over the research aspects typically reserved for researchers. Patient or Public Contribution: We involved members of the public with lived experience throughout this study—co‐design, co‐facilitation, collaboratively mapping the disability or disability‐related survey questions into conceptual models of disability, evaluation of the activities, co‐analysis and co‐authorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the United Kingdom, fractures of the cervical dens process in older and/or frail patients are usually managed nonsurgically in a hard collar. However, hard collars can lead to complications and this management approach is now being questioned, with growing interest in maximising patients' short‐term quality‐of‐life. It is vital that patients' perspectives are considered; yet, there is a dearth of literature examining the aspect. To help inform wider decision‐making about use of collar/no collar management of dens fractures in older/frail people, we explored older/frail people's experience of the two management approaches and how they affected their perceived quality‐of‐life. Methods: We interviewed older and/or frail adults with a recent dens fracture (aged ≥65 years or with a clinical frailty score of ≥5) or their caregiver. Participants were recruited from both arms of a clinical trial comparing management using a hard collar for 12 weeks (SM) with early removal of the collar (ERC) and were interviewed following randomisation and again, 12–16 weeks later. Data were analysed using a framework approach. Results: Both participant groups (SM/ERC) reported substantial, negative quality‐of‐life (QoL) experiences, with the fall itself and lack of access to care services and information being frequent major contributory factors. Many negative experiences cut across both participant groups, including pain, fatigue, diminished autonomy and reduced involvement in personally meaningful activities. However, we identified some subtle, yet discernible, ways in which using SM/ERC reinforced or alleviated (negative) QoL impacts, with the perceived benefits/burdens to using SM/ERC varying between different individuals. Conclusion: Study findings can be used to support informed decision‐making about SM/ERC management of dens fractures in older/frail patients. Patient or Public Contribution: Public and patient involvement contributors were involved in the study design, development of interview topic guides and interpretation of study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of applied theatre in engaging both lay and professional publics with debate on health policy and practice is an emergent field. This paper discusses the development, production performance and discussion of 'Inside View'. The objectives were to produce applied theatre from research findings of a completed study on genetic prenatal screening, exploring the dilemmas for women and health professionals of prenatal genetic screening, and to engage audiences in debate and reflection on the dilemmas of prenatal genetic screening. 'Inside View' was developed from a multidisciplinary research study through identification of emergent themes from qualitative interviews, and development of these by the writer, theatre producer and media technologist with input from the researchers. Inside View was performed in London and the Midlands to varied audiences with a panel discussion and evaluation post performance. The audiences were engaged in debate that was relevant to them professionally and personally. Knowledge translation through applied theatre is an effective tool for engaging the public but the impact subsequently is unclear. There are ethical issues of unexpected disclosure during discussion post performance and the process of transforming research findings into applied theatre requires time and trust within the multidisciplinary team as well as adequate resourcing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To understand how materiality affects patient and public involvement (PPI) for commissioning and leading health and care services in the English National Health Service (NHS) context. Context: From April 2013 groups of general practitioners (GPs) became members of NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to assess needs and procure core health services for and with local communities. Since July 2022, integrated care systems (ICSs) have subsumed this responsibility. NHS reorganisations have been driven by the promise of more effective and efficient health care and have led to a long history of PPI on economic, political, and moral grounds. Few studies researching PPI in clinical commissioning exist and fewer still have explored a more agentic understanding of materiality and its impact on PPI. Study Design: A focused ethnography was used to examine PPI for clinical commissioning within two CCG case study sites in England. Three CCG Governing Body lay representatives, nine GP commissioners and seven service user representatives took part in focus groups and/or were interviewed. Fifteen nonparticipant observations were also carried out at CCG meetings and the associated materiality was examined. Findings: The materiality of activities involved in clinical commissioning influences and shapes the nature of PPI. These forms of materiality may dilute and subvert meaningful engagement and involvement that relies on trust, leadership, learning, and partnership working. Conclusion: System leaders in ICSs should consider the significance of materiality in centrally driven processes involved in PPI commissioning to reduce barriers and ensure meaningful partnerships within local communities. Patient and Public Contribution: The study design ensured PPI throughout the research process in keeping with contemporary research practice guidance. The project steering committee included service users with current or recent PPI clinical commissioning experience outside of the study sites. There was PPI involvement in the original study proposal and its development including the bid for doctoral funds on which this study is based. All were involved in assessing the rigour of the data collection, interpretation of the findings and ensuring the project remained true to the aims of the study. Two members have also participated in presentation of the study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Remote home monitoring models were implemented during the COVID‐19 pandemic to shorten hospital length of stay, reduce unnecessary hospital admission, readmission and infection and appropriately escalate care. Within these models, patients are asked to take and record readings and escalate care if advised. There is limited evidence on how patients and carers experience these services. This study aimed to evaluate patient experiences of, and engagement with, remote home monitoring models for COVID‐19. Methods: A rapid mixed‐methods study was carried out in England (conducted from March to June 2021). We remotely conducted a cross‐sectional survey and semi‐structured interviews with patients and carers. Interview findings were summarized using rapid assessment procedures sheets and data were grouped into themes (using thematic analysis). Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Results: We received 1069 surveys (18% response rate) and conducted interviews with patients (n = 59) or their carers (n = 3). 'Care' relied on support from staff members and family/friends. Patients and carers reported positive experiences and felt that the service and human contact reassured them and was easy to engage with. Yet, some patients and carers identified problems with engagement (e.g., hesitancy to self‐escalate care). Engagement was influenced by patient factors such as health and knowledge, support from family/friends and staff, availability and ease of use of informational and material resources (e.g., equipment) and service factors. Conclusion: Remote home monitoring models place responsibility on patients to self‐manage symptoms in partnership with staff; yet, many patients required support and preferred human contact (especially for identifying problems). Caring burden and experiences of those living alone and barriers to engagement should be considered when designing and implementing remote home monitoring services. Patient or Public Contribution: The study team met with service users and public members of the evaluation teams throughout the project in a series of workshops. Workshops informed study design, data collection tools and data interpretation and were conducted to also discuss study dissemination. Public patient involvement (PPI) members helped to pilot patient surveys and interview guides with the research team. Some members of the public also piloted the patient survey. Members of the PPI group were given the opportunity to comment on the manuscript, and the manuscript was amended accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is limited evidence for the impact of involving patients and the public (PPI) in health research. Descriptions of the PPI process are seldom included in publications, particularly data analysis, yet an understanding of processes and impacts of PPI is essential if its contribution to research is to be evaluated. Objective: To describe the 'how' of PPI in qualitative data analysis and critically reflect on potential impact. Methods: We focus on the development and critical reflection of our step‐by‐step approach to collaborative qualitative data analysis (through a series of analysis workshops) in a specific care home study, and our long‐term engagement model with patients and the public (termed PPI partners). Results: An open access PPI group, with multiple events over time, sustained broad interest in care home research. Recordings of interview clips, role‐play of interview excerpts and written theme summaries were used in workshops to facilitate PPI partner engagement with data analysis in a specific study. PPI resulted in changes to data interpretation and was perceived to make the research process accessible. We reflect on the challenge of judging the benefits of PPI and presenting PPI in research publications for critical commentary. Conclusions: Patient and public involvement partners who are actively engaged with data analysis can positively influence research studies. However, guidance for researchers is needed on approaches to PPI, including appropriate levels and methods for evaluation. Without more systematic approaches, we argue that it is impossible to know whether PPI represents good use of resources and is generating a real impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Local Healthwatch have been operating since 2013 as 'consumer champions' in health and social care in England. There is little evidence about how they operate and the daily practices through which they seek to represent citizen views and influence others. Objective: To explore (a) the current organizational arrangements, relationships and impact of local Healthwatch in England, and (b) to what extent do these vary across local Healthwatch organizations. Design: An online survey of all 150 local Healthwatch in England between December 2018 and January 2019. The survey comprised 47 questions and used a combination of closed‐ and open‐response questions. Results: We received responses from 96 local Healthwatch (68% response rate). Most local Healthwatch reported that they are 'independent' organizations that only do Healthwatch‐related work (58.3%) and are funded through a contract (79.2%). Budget cuts have affected four‐fifths of local Healthwatch (79.3%) since 2013. Three‐quarters (74%) of local Healthwatch currently receive funding external to that provided by their local authority for their Healthwatch functions. Most Healthwatch engage with only one CCG (56.3%), one mental health trust (82.3%) and one community health trust (62.5%), though 59.4% engage with more than one hospital trust. Healthwatch respondents overwhelmingly reported impacts that were local in nature. Conclusions: Geographical and historical factors, the quality and quantity of their relationships with stakeholders, and different funding arrangements all contribute to high variability in the structure and activities of local Healthwatch and to shaping the nature of their work and impact across England. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High profile failures of care in the NHS have raised concerns about regulatory systems for health‐care professionals and organizations. In response, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the regulator of health and social care in England overhauled its regulatory regime. It moved to inspections which made much greater use of expert knowledge, data and views from a range of stakeholders, including service users. Objective: We explore the role of service users and citizens in health and social care regulation, including how CQC involved people in inspecting and rating health and social care providers. Design: We analyse CQC reports and documents, and 61 interviews with CQC staff and representatives of groups of service users and citizens and voluntary sector organizations to explore the place of service user voice in regulatory processes. Results: Care Quality Commission invited comments and facilitated the sharing of existing service user experiences and engaged with representatives of groups of service users and voluntary sector organizations. CQC involved service users in their inspections as "experts by experience." Information from service users informed both the inspection regime and individual inspections, but CQC was less focused on giving feedback to service users who contributed to these activities. Discussion and conclusions: Service users can make an important contribution to regulation by sharing their experiences and having their voices heard, but their involvement was somewhat transactional, and largely on terms set by CQC. There may be scope for CQC to build more enduring relationships with service user groups and to engage them more effectively in the regulatory regime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reciprocal relationships between researchers and patient and public involvement (PPI) contributors can enable successful PPI in research. However, research and anecdotal evidence suggest that researchers do not commonly provide feedback to PPI contributors thus preventing them from knowing whether, how or where their contributions were useful to researchers and research overall. Aims: The aim of this study was to explore the variation, types, importance of, and satisfaction with feedback given by researchers to PPI contributors in six PPI groups in England, and identify the barriers to the process of feedback. Methods: An explanatory mixed methods sequential study design with a questionnaire survey followed by semi‐structured interviews with researchers and PPI contributors in six PPI groups. PPI contributors were involved in all stages of the research process. Results: Researchers do not routinely give feedback to PPI contributors. Feedback was found to have different meanings: an acknowledgement, impact and study success and progress. PPI contributors who receive feedback are motivated for further involvement; it supports their learning and development and prompts researchers to reflect on PPI impact. The importance of the role of a PPI lead or coordinator to facilitate the process of providing feedback was also highlighted. Conclusion: This study found no generic way to give feedback indicating that mutual feedback expectations should be discussed at the outset. PPI feedback needs to become integral to the research process with appropriate time and resources allocated. PPI feedback can be seen as a key indicator of mature, embedded PPI in research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in systematic reviews remains uncommon, despite the policy imperative for patient involvement in research. The aim of this study was to investigate the process and impact of collaborating with members of a patient Research User Group (RUG) on a systematic review about shared decision making around prescribing analgesia in primary care consultations. Methods Five members of an established patient RUG collaborated with researchers undertaking a systematic review with narrative synthesis, through workshops held at three time-points. These addressed the following: designing the protocol, interpreting the results and planning dissemination. Support from a RUG coordinator and user support worker facilitated collaboration throughout the review process. Researchers reflected on how PPIE modified the review at each time-point. Results RUG members identified factors important in shared decision making around analgesic prescribing additional to those initially proposed by the research team. Search terms and specific outcomes of interest were amended to reflect these additional factors. Thirty of the 39 patient-identified factors were absent in the published literature. The categories of factors identified were used as a framework for the narrative synthesis and for reporting results. RUG members prioritized options for disseminating the results. Conclusion PPIE collaboration throughout the systematic review impacted on the scope of the review, highlighting gaps in the literature that were important to patients. Impact on interpretation and dissemination of findings ensured the review directly reflected patient priorities. Challenges and strategies to facilitate PPIE involvement in systematic reviews and suggestions for future researchers are highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The involvement of consumers and the general public in improving cancer services is an important component of health services. However, consumer involvement in cancer research is relatively unexplored. The objective of this study was to explore different ways of involving consumers in cancer research in one regional network. Methods: Thames Valley Cancer Network Consumer Research Partnership (CRP) group was formed in 2009. The group consists of consumers and professionals to help in promoting consumer involvement in Cancer Research in the Thames Valley. This study evaluated the project of consumer involvement in cancer research in the Thames Valley from March 2010 to March 2011. We used different indices to judge the level of consumer involvement: number of projects involving consumers through the group, types of projects, level of involvement (ranged from consultation on research documents to collaborating in preparing grant applications) and the methods of involving consumers in cancer research. Results: Fifteen projects were submitted to the CRP group during the 12‐month period studied. Of these, eight projects were clinical trials, three were qualitative research projects, two were patients' surveys and two were non‐randomized interventional studies. Seven projects requested consumer involvement on patient information sheets for clinical trials. Of these seven applications, three also requested consumers' help in designing research questionnaires and another three requested that consumers should be involved in their project management group. In addition, four projects involved consumers in the proposal development phase and another four projects asked for advice on how to increase trial recruitment, conduct patient interviews or help with grant applications. Conclusions: The creation of the CRP and this audit of its activity have documented consumer involvement in cancer research in the Thames Valley. We have clearly shown that consumers can be involved in designing and managing cancer research projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is good practice for the public to be involved in developing health research. Resources should be available for researchers to fund the involvement of the public in the development of their grants. Objective: To describe a funding award scheme to support public involvement in grant development, managed by an NIHR Research Design Service (RDS). Case examples of how the award contributed to successful grant applications and findings from a recent evaluation of the scheme are presented. Design: A case study of resource provision to support public involvement activities in one region of England. Participants: University and NHS‐based researchers, and members of the public. Findings: Between 2009 and 2012, the RDS approved 45 public involvement funding awards (totalling nearly £19 000). These awards contributed to 27 submitted applications at the time of writing, of which 11 were successful (totalling over £7.5 million). The evaluation revealed difficulties encountered by some researchers when involving the public in grant development, which led to suggestions about how the scheme could be improved. Conclusion: This award scheme represents an efficient method of providing researchers with resources to involve the public in grant development and would appear to represent good value for money. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In recent years, patient-focused interventions have been introduced aimed at increasing patient involvement in safety-related behaviours. However, patients' attitudes towards these interventions and comfort in participating in the recommended behaviours remain largely unexplored. Objective To evaluate patients' attitudes towards a video and leaflet aimed at encouraging patient involvement in safety-related behaviours. Design Two exploratory studies employing a within-subjects mixed-methods design. Setting Six hospital wards on an inner-city London teaching hospital. Participants Medical and surgical inpatients: 80 patients in study 1 (mean age 55; 69% men) and 80 patients in study 2 (mean age 52; 60% men). Intervention Patients watched the PINK patient safety video (study 1) or read the National Patient Safety Agency's 'Please Ask' about staying in hospital leaflet (study 2). Main outcome measures Perceived comfort in participating in safety-related behaviours; attitudes towards the video or leaflet. Results Both video and leaflet increased patients' perceived comfort in engaging in some (but not all) safety-related behaviours ( P < 0.05). In both studies, the majority of patients questioned whether the intervention could help to reduce medical errors in health care. Suggestions on how the video/leaflet could be improved mainly related to content and layout. Conclusion Video and leaflet could be effective at encouraging patient involvement in some safety-related behaviours. Further in-depth research on patients' attitudes towards different educational materials is required to help inform future policies and interventions in this very important but under-researched area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Despite the policy rhetoric, patient involvement in health service decisions remains limited. Highlighted barriers include a concern that most patients are unable to see beyond personal aspects of their care in order to contribute meaningfully to health service development, and a perception that professionals do not welcome patient involvement. Objectives We aimed to explore respiratory patients' awareness of changes in local health service provision and provide insight into health professionals' attitudes to engaging patients. Methods Nested within an ethnographic study of health service reconfiguration, we recruited 31 patients with a range of respiratory diseases from four case study areas in England and Wales. Data from telephone interviews, illness diaries and focus groups with patients, and interviews with health professionals and managers were transcribed and analysed using the Framework approach. Results Participants were not only aware of trends in health service provision (e.g. emergence of new professional roles, shift from secondary to primary care) but interpreted changes in the light of local and national events. Despite this awareness, none of the patients was formally involved in service development, though some contributed to local voluntary groups. Professionals generally welcomed the need for patients' views to be heard. Discussion and conclusions Our data give grounds for optimism. Patients are aware of and interested in a broad range of health-related issues. Professionals' motivation to involve patients in service development may be underestimated. Although practical obstacles remain, our findings should encourage the ongoing search for effective models of promoting patient engagement in health-care services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]