Search

Objective: This article addresses the persistent challenge of Delayed Hospital Discharge (DHD) and aims to provide a comprehensive overview, synthesis, and actionable, sustainable plan based on the synthesis of the systematic review articles spanning the past 24 years. Our research aims to comprehensively examine DHD, identifying its primary causes and emphasizing the significance of effective communication and management in healthcare settings. Methods: We conducted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR) method for synthesizing findings from 23 review papers published over the last two decades, encompassing over 700 studies. In addition, we employed a practical and comprehensive framework to tackle DHD. Rooted in Linderman's model, our approach focused on continuous process improvement (CPI), which highlights senior management commitment, technical/administrative support, and social/transitional care. Our proposed CPI method comprised several stages: planning, implementation, data analysis, and adaptation, all contributing to continuous improvement in healthcare delivery. This method provided valuable insights and recommendations for addressing DHD challenges. Findings: Our DHD analysis revealed crucial insights across multiple dimensions. Firstly, examining causes and interventions uncovered issues such as limited discharge destinations, signaling unsustainable solutions, and inefficient care coordination. The second aspect explored the patient and caregiver experience, emphasizing challenges linked to staff uncertainty and negative physical environments, with notable attention to the underexplored area of caregiver experience. The third theme explored organizational and individual factors, including cognitive impairment and socioeconomic influences. The findings emphasized the importance of incorporating patients' data, recognizing its complexity and current avoidance. Finally, the role of transitional and social care and financial strategies was scrutinized, emphasizing the need for multicomponent, context‐specific interventions to address DHD effectively. Conclusion: This study addresses gaps in the literature, challenges prevailing solutions, and offers practical pathways for reducing DHD, contributing significantly to healthcare quality and patient outcomes. The synthesis introduces the vital CPI stage, enhancing Linderman's work and providing a pragmatic framework to eradicate delayed discharge. Future efforts will address practitioner consultations to enhance perspectives and further enrich the study. Patient or Public Contribution: Our scoping review synthesizes and analyzes existing systematic review articles and emphasizes offering practical, actionable solutions. While our approach does not directly engage patients, it strategically focuses on extracting insights from the literature to create a CPI framework. This unique aspect is intentionally designed to yield tangible benefits for patients, service users, caregivers, and the public. Our actionable recommendations aim to improve hospital discharge processes for better healthcare outcomes and experiences. This detailed analysis goes beyond theoretical considerations and provides a practical guide to improve healthcare practices and policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: First Nations Australians experience a higher burden and severity of Rheumatic Disease with poorer outcomes than the general population. Despite a widely acknowledged need to improve health outcomes, there has been minimal research assessing existing models of care from a First Nations perspective in Australia. The objective of this study was to describe First Nations experiences and barriers and enablers to accessing a hospital‐based adult Rheumatology service in Sydney. Methods: A qualitative study using semi‐structured interviews was undertaken. Patients who self‐identified as First Nations attending the Prince of Wales Hospital Rheumatology Clinic in 2021 were invited to participate. Interviews were conducted face‐to‐face or by telephone using culturally‐appropriate Yarning methods with an Aboriginal Health Worker (AHW) at the request of participants. Thematic analysis was done in consultation with an Aboriginal Reference Group (ARG). Results: Four categories, which encapsulated 11 themes were identified. Participants reported barriers to care such as logistics of the referral process, not feeling culturally safe because of uncomfortable clinic environments and health worker behaviours, inadequate cultural support and community perceptions of the specialty. Enabling factors included family member involvement, AHW support and telehealth consultation. Conclusion: The current model of care perpetuates access challenges for First Nations Australians within rheumatology. Barriers to care include the delayed referral process, limited cultural responsivity in the clinic environment and poor cross‐cultural communication. There is a need for models of care that are co‐designed with First Nations Peoples to address these barriers. Patient and Public Contribution: Participants were First Nations Australians with lived experience attending the rheumatology clinic. All interviewees were offered the opportunity to review their transcripts to ensure trustworthiness of the data. Preliminary thematic analysis was conducted in partnership with the AHW who has over 20 years experience. Following preliminary coding, a list of themes were presented to the ARG for iterative discussion and refinement. The ARG provided community representation and ensured that First Nations voices were privileged in the analysis. It's intended that the findings of this study will support the upcoming co‐design of a First Nations health service for Rheumatology patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Community health workers represent a critical part of the health outreach and services for migrant and seasonal farmworkers ('farmworkers') in rural areas of the United States. Purpose: We sought to identify adaptations to farmworker patient engagement and health outreach made by community health workers during the first 18 months of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: In this qualitative study, we used semi‐structured interviews with community health workers from August 2020 to February 2022 (n = 21). Two coders used thematic analysis to identify three themes related to the experiences of community health workers in conducting health education and outreach to farmworkers prior to and following the onset of the pandemic. Findings: We found themes related to pre‐pandemic outreach efforts to provide health education resource sharing with farmworkers and pandemic‐related outreach efforts that included adoption of porch drops and distanced delivery of health education, adaptation of modes of health education and communication through technology and the internet, and taking on new roles related to COVID‐19. Finally, we identified changes that reverted after the pandemic or will continue as adaptations. Conclusions: Community health workers created practice‐based innovations in outreach in response to the COVID‐19 pandemic. These innovations included new COVID‐19 related roles and new modes of health education and outreach, including the use of digital resources. The changes developed for emergency use in COVID‐19, particularly related to internet and technology, have likely altered how community health workers conduct outreach in North Carolina going forward. Funders, community health worker training programs, and researchers should take note of these innovations. Patient or Public Contribution: Community health workers who typically come from patient populations and provide critical navigation and connection with the health care system advised on the design and creation of this research project, including serving on an advisory board. Two authors have experience working as community health workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Healthcare professionals have an important role in advocating for the adoption of a brain‐healthy lifestyle for optimal multiple sclerosis (MS) care. Nonetheless, studies to date have mainly focussed on the consumer perspective. Herein, we aimed to explore the current practices of how healthcare professionals support protective, lifestyle‐related behaviour changes to optimise brain health among people living with MS (plwMS), and their perspectives of professional roles. Methods: Australian healthcare professionals were recruited via study advertisements, purposive and snowball sampling, to participate in an online, semi‐structured and audio‐recorded interview. Clinicians were eligible if they had a minimum of a tertiary Bachelor's degree and 12‐months experience working with plwMS, access to the Internet and sufficient time to participant. An inductive, data‐driven form of reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken before thematic categorisation of the quotes from transcripts. Data analysis was guided by the methods of Braun and Clark and the study's underpinnings drew on the constructs of the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). Results: Six physicians, 10 MS nurses, 18 allied health professionals, one exercise therapist and one alternative therapist were interviewed. Three primary themes encompassing the perceived role of healthcare professionals in supporting a brain‐healthy lifestyle were identified: (1) the empowering role, (2) collaborative role and (3) communicative role. External factors/forces including time constraints, professional expertise, training and skill set, power dynamics, consumer readiness, health literacy, self‐efficacy and motivation are at play, and affect how/when healthcare professionals may support behaviour change to optimise lifelong brain health for plwMS. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals recognise their critical role in encouraging and supporting the adoption of a brain‐healthy lifestyle to optimise lifelong brain health for plwMS. However, discord is evident when they underestimate the complexity of translating knowledge of lifestyle‐related behaviour change(s) into action. Greater awareness must be made in recognising and addressing the bidirectionality of external factors such as those in the SCT, that may influence how behaviour change occurs. Public Contribution: Healthcare professionals volunteered to be interviewed as part of the data collection phase of this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is essential for women's health research. Little is known about how women engage with humorous social media and behavioural health messaging targeting pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT). This PPI aimed to understand how women engage with a humorous social media campaign encouraging PFMT. The study findings will influence the co‐design of a digital intervention to support women's adherence to PFMT. Methods: The Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public Version 2 short form was used to report the study's findings. The study examined public engagement with a humorous social media campaign encouraging PFMT in women. A healthcare professional and comedian ran the campaign following the national guidelines for engagement in PFMT. Instagram analytics gave insight into the demographics of the public who engaged, how they engaged and the most popular content. The behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used in the digital nudges that generated the highest levels of engagement were analysed using the Capability Opportunity Motivation Behaviour Change Wheel. Results: The majority (96%) of the population showing the highest levels of engagement were women aged 35–44 years and were based in the United Kingdom (77%). The Instagram account saw an increase in engagement by 12% over the 3‐month campaign, with 22,032 users seeing digital nudges and 2645 engaging with the digital nudges. The preferred way of engaging was using Likes (9723). The common themes in the digital nudges that generated the highest levels of engagement were BCTs associated with the 'social influences' theoretical domain framework that targeted the core behaviour opportunity. Conclusion: The study findings suggest humour may improve women's engagement with online PFMT programmes; however, more rigorous research is required to better understand diverse women's experiences of humorous online PFMT nudges. Future studies may use PFMT mobile apps instead of social media to capture true user engagement and adherence to PFMT more accurately. The insights gained from the study will be taken forward to co‐design a digital behavioural intervention as part of a larger study. Public Contribution: Members of the public were involved in the co‐design of a digital health intervention that will be trialled as part of a larger research study. The public was involved using the social media platform Instagram. Public engagement with a humorous social media campaign to encourage women to engage with pelvic floor exercises was captured using Instagram analytics, for example, the timing of engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a need for better implementation of patient‐centred (PC) communication and shared decision‐making (SDM) in routine cancer care. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess whether a programme to implement SDM in oncology had effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. Design: This study constitutes a secondary analysis of data derived from an implementation trial applying a stepped wedge design that, among other strategies, incorporated training and coaching to enhance the PC communication skills of physicians. Setting and Participants: We analysed audio recordings of clinical encounters collected in three departments of a comprehensive cancer centre in Germany before and after rolling out the implementation programme. Main Variables Studied: We assessed the PC communication skills of physicians. Main Outcome Measures: Each recording was rated by two researchers using the German version of the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), an observer‐based measure of PC communication. Interrater reliability of the outcome measure was acceptable but moderate. Demographic data of patients participating in audio recordings were analysed. Methods: Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed‐effects models. Results: In total, 146 encounters, 74 before and 72 after implementation, were evaluated. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years (SD = 13.8), 70.3% were female, the largest portion of patients had medium formal education (32.4%) and were (self‐) employed (37.8%). No statistically significant effect of the implementation programme on the physicians' PC communication skills was found. Discussion: The results indicate that the investigated programme to implement SDM in oncology, including training and coaching, had no effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. These results are in contrast to other studies that report the effects of specific training or coaching on PC communication. Reasons for the lack of effect include the short duration of our training compared to other studies, limited reliability and moderate interrater reliability of the 4HCS scale, limited reach of the intervention programme as well as the inclusion of physicians regardless of their exposure to the interventions. Conclusion: Further research is needed to develop implementation strategies that improve physicians' PC communication skills. Patient Contribution: Data on patients and clinical encounters with patients and physicians were analysed. There was no other patient or public involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding healthcare professionals' (HCPs) experiences of caring for women with false‐positive screening test results in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) is important for reducing the impact of such results. Methods: Interviews were undertaken with 12 HCPs from a single NHSBSP unit, including advanced radiographer practitioners, breast radiographers, breast radiologists, clinical nurse specialists (CNSs), and a radiology healthcare assistant. Data were analysed thematically using Template Analysis. Results: Two themes were produced: (1) Gauging and navigating women's anxiety during screening assessment was an inevitable and necessary task for all participants. CNSs were perceived as particularly adept at this, while breast radiographers reported a lack of adequate formal training. (2) Controlling the delivery of information to women (including amount, type and timing of information). HCPs reported various communication strategies to facilitate women's information processing and retention during a distressing time. Conclusions: Women's anxiety could be reduced through dedicated CNS support, but this should not replace support from other HCPs. Breast radiographers may benefit from more training to emotionally support recalled women. While HCPs emphasised taking a patient‐centred communication approach, the use of other strategies (e.g., standardised scripts) and the constraints of the 'one‐stop shop' model pose challenges to such an approach. Patient and Public Contribution: During the study design, two Patient and Public Involvement members (women with false‐positive‐breast screening test results) were consulted to gain an understanding of patient perspectives and experiences of being recalled specifically in the NHSBSP. Their feedback informed the formulations of the research aim, objectives and the direction of the interview guide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is critically important in healthcare research. A useful starting point for researchers to understand the scope of PPIE is to review the definition from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) as, 'research being carried out "with" or "by" members of the public rather than "to", "about" or "for" them'. PPIE does not refer to participation in research, but to actively shaping its direction. The 'Effectiveness of a decision support tool to optimise community‐based tailored management of sleep for people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment (TIMES)' study is funded through the NIHR programme grant for applied research. TIMES has thoroughly embraced PPIE by ensuring the person's voice is heard, understood, and valued. This editorial showcases how the TIMES project maximised inclusivity, and we share our experiences and top tips for other researchers. We base our reflections on the six key UK standards for public involvement; Inclusive Opportunities, Working Together, Support and Learning, Communications, Impact and Governance. We present our work, which had been co‐led by our PPIE leads, academics and partners including, together in dementia everyday, Innovations in Dementia, The UK Network of Dementia Voices (Dementia Engagement & Empowerment Project) and Liverpool Chinese Wellbeing. We have a Lived Experience Advisory Forum on Sleep, which includes people with dementia, family carers, representatives of the South Asian Community and the Chinese community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Digital contact tracing (DCT) was a central component of the global response to containing COVID‐19. Research has raised concerns that DCT could exacerbate inequities, yet the experiences of diverse communities at greater risk from COVID‐19 are typically underrepresented. Methods: The present study aimed to understand the perceived barriers to the adoption of the app amongst Māori, Pasifika, and disabled people. Focus groups and interviews were undertaken with Māori, Pasifika, and disability sector stakeholders and community participants. Results: Participants (n = 34) generally expressed willingness to utilise DCT and support its adoption within the communities. Simultaneously, participants revealed how the app could marginalise community members who struggled with the usability and those distrusting of the government's COVID‐19 interventions. Conclusions: The findings highlight how addressing communication inequality can assist in the development of contact‐tracing responses that are both effective and equitable. The study provides insights about the role of information and communication technologies as health resources. Patient or Public Contribution: Consulting with members of the target communities was central throughout the present study, including recommendations for potential participants, participation in interviews and sharing early findings for feedback. This study reports on focus groups and interviews with individuals from Māori and disability sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Involving people with lived experience is fundamental to healthcare development and delivery. This is especially true for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) services, where holistic and personalised models of care are becoming increasingly important. There is, however, a significant lack of representation of underserved and diverse groups in IBD research, and there are significant barriers to healthcare access and utilisation among minority groups in IBD. IBD centres need to be aware of these experiences to address barriers via service changes, improve interactions with local communities and promote meaningful engagement for improved health outcomes. Methods: A pragmatic community‐based approach was taken to engage with leaders and members of underserved groups across 11 workshops representing Roma, Afro‐Caribbean, people of African descent and the wider black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities, Muslim women, refugee community members, deprived areas of South Yorkshire, LGBTQ+ and deaf populations. Thematic analysis of field notes identified patterns of attention across the community groups and where improvements to services were most frequently suggested. Results: Findings demonstrated several barriers experienced to healthcare access and utilisation, including language accessibility, staff attitudes and awareness, mental health and stigma, continuity of support, and practical factors such as ease of service use and safe spaces. These barriers acted as a lever to co‐producing service changes that are responsive to the health and social care needs of these groups. Conclusions: Engaging with people from a range of communities is imperative for ensuring that service improvements in IBD are accessible and representative of individual needs and values. Patient or Public Contribution: Local community leaders and members of community groups actively participated in the co‐design and development of improvements to the IBD service for a local hospital. Their contributions further informed a pilot process for quality improvement programmes in IBD centres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To guide good practices in patient and public involvement (PPI), several calls have been made to share detailed accounts of practical experiences. We describe our collaboration with young people with a chronic condition (YPCC) in the development, testing and implementation of the digital communication tool MyBoT (Map your Burden of Treatment). Methods: MyBoT was developed by a team of academic researchers, some of whom were practising care providers, YPCC and designers. In addition to the two co‐researchers in the research team, various groups of YPCC were involved in decision‐making through participation in a design session, workshops and a dialogue session. The Involvement Matrix was used to reflect on the PPI of all YPCC. Results: Initially, the two co‐researchers were involved in the roles of informer and co‐thinker, but their decision‐making power within the study increased over time. In the final stages of the study, the co‐researchers and researchers became partners. The other YPCC who participated in the different sessions and workshops were co‐thinkers in all stages of the study. Conclusion: The PPI of two YPCCs as co‐researchers within the research team ensured continuous involvement, whereas the PPI of various groups of YPCCs guaranteed a representative and inclusive approach. Researchers play an essential role in bringing all perspectives together, integrating them within the technical and financial constraints and ultimately building a tool that is tailored to its users' needs. Patient or Public Contribution: YPCC played a significant role in the present study. Two YPCC—who are also co‐authors of this paper—were involved in all stages of this project as members of the research team. In addition, various YPCCs were involved in the development, testing and implementation stage of MyBoT by organizing design sessions, workshops and a dialogue session. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Shared decision‐making intends to align care provision with individuals' preferences. However, the involvement of people living with dementia in decision‐making about their care varies. We aimed to co‐design the EMBED‐Care Framework, to enhance shared decision‐making between people affected by dementia and practitioners. Methods: A theory and evidence driven co‐design study was conducted, using iterative workshops, informed by a theoretical model of shared decision‐making and the EMBED‐Care Framework (the intervention) for person‐centred holistic palliative dementia care. The intervention incorporates a holistic outcome measure for assessment and review, linked with clinical decision‐support tools to support shared decision‐making. We drew on the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance for developing and evaluating complex interventions. Participants included people with dementia of any type, current or bereaved family carers and practitioners. We recruited via established dementia groups and research and clinical networks. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to explore how and when the intervention could enhance communication and shared decision‐making, and the requirements for use, presented as a logic model. Results: Five co‐design workshops were undertaken with participants comprising people affected by dementia (n = 18) and practitioners (n = 36). Three themes were generated, comprising: (1) 'knowing the person and personalisation of care', involving the person with dementia and/or family carer identifying the needs of the person using a holistic assessment. (2) 'engaging and considering the perspectives of all involved in decision‐making' required listening to the person and the family to understand their priorities, and to manage multiple preferences. (3) 'Training and support activities' to use the Framework through use of animated videos to convey information, such as to understand the outcome measure used to assess symptoms. Conclusions: The intervention developed sought to enhance shared decision‐making with individuals affected by dementia and practitioners, through increased shared knowledge of individual priorities and choices for care and treatment. The workshops generated understanding to manage disagreements in determining priorities. Practitioners require face‐to‐face training on the intervention, and on communication to manage sensitive conversations about symptoms, care and treatment with individuals and their family. The findings informed the construction of a logic model to illustrate how the intervention is intended to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The co‐occurrence of depression among tuberculosis (TB) patients is a critical issue, contributing to poor treatment outcomes, prolonged hospitalisations and increased healthcare expenses. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of delivering a co‐designed depression care pathway within TB services in Pakistan. Design: Mixed‐method study. Setting and Participants: Routine depression screening for TB patients was conducted at three TB facilities in Peshawar, Pakistan, encompassing primary, secondary and tertiary care settings. All patients aged 18 or above (male and female) attending the three TB facilities between November 2021 and February 2022 were included in the study using the consecutive sampling technique. Results: A total of 301 people with confirmed TB, within the past 4 weeks, visited the three TB care facilities; 191/301 patients were screened for depression. Approximately 35% of the 191 TB patients screened positive for depression, with varying severity levels. Qualitative findings highlighted the acceptability of integrated depression care, emphasising the importance of open communication and empathetic attitudes. Barriers to integration include stigma, logistical challenges, patient noncompliance and cost burdens. Facilitators included the empathetic attitude of healthcare providers and the availability of mental health services within the same facility. Conclusion: There is a high burden of depression in patients with TB, highlighting the pressing need for mental health support in this population. Acceptability of integrated care was evident, with factors such as co‐located mental health services, training healthcare providers and provider empathetic attitudes playing a crucial role. Further research is required to evaluate the effectiveness of the integrated TB‐depression screening systems towards improved health outcomes, implementation, scalability and impact on the broader healthcare system. Patient and Public Contribution: To create a more inclusive and comprehensive TB and depression care pathway, we gathered input from both service providers and service users (TB patients, their carers). Reflective meetings with community leaders, social activists and health professionals from various sectors were also conducted during pathway delivery to get their insights. Power, gender and age imbalances were addressed by encouraging participation of patients and carers across gender and age groups. This approach ensured that the perspectives of all stakeholders were considered in the development of the care pathway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: General practice data, particularly when combined with hospital and other health service data through data linkage, are increasingly being used for quality assurance, evaluation, health service planning and research. In this study, we explored community views on sharing general practice data for secondary purposes, including research, to establish what concerns and conditions need to be addressed in the process of developing a social licence to support such use. Methods: We used a mixed‐methods approach with focus groups (November–December 2021), followed by a cross‐sectional survey (March–April 2022). Results: The participants in this study strongly supported sharing general practice data with the clinicians responsible for their care, and where there were direct benefits for individual patients. Over 90% of survey participants (N = 2604) were willing to share their general practice information to directly support their health care, that is, for the primary purpose of collection. There was less support for sharing data for secondary purposes such as research and health service planning (36% and 45% respectively in broad agreement) or for linking general practice data to data in the education, social services and criminal justice systems (30%–36%). A substantial minority of participants were unsure or could not see how benefits would arise from sharing data for secondary purposes. Participants were concerned about the potential for privacy breaches, discrimination and data misuse and they wanted greater transparency and an opportunity to consent to data release. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the public may be more concerned about sharing general practice data for secondary purposes than they are about sharing data collected in other settings. Sharing general practice data more broadly will require careful attention to patient and public concerns, including focusing on the factors that will sustain trust and legitimacy in general practice and GPs. Patient and Public Contribution: Members of the public were participants in the study. Data produced from their participation generated study findings. Clinical Trial Registration: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Effective consumer engagement practices can enhance patient safety. This is important for consumers from ethnic minority backgrounds who are exposed to increased risk of patient safety events. Using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model, this study explored staff experiences of creating opportunities for engagement with consumers from ethnic minority backgrounds to contribute to their cancer care safety. Method: A qualitative study was conducted using semistructured interviews with cancer service staff from four cancer services across two states in Australia. Purposive sampling was used to recruit healthcare staff from a diverse range of professions. Data were analysed using the Framework Analysis method. Results: Fifty‐four interviews were conducted with healthcare staff. Analysis of the qualitative interview data identified enablers and associated challenges that contributed to creating a shared understanding between consumers and staff of the information, processes, expectations and problems arising in care. Enablers and challenges are reported in relation to four themes: (1) co‐creating safety through shared understanding of care processes; (2) tools and technologies support planned communication; (3) organisational policy levers exist but lack implementation in direct care and (4) formal tasks incorporate consumer engagement more readily than informal interactions. Conclusion: The availability of infrastructure and resources to support communication with consumers from ethnic minority backgrounds was limited to specific tasks across the cancer care continuum. Strategies implemented by health services to foster effective communication during formal interactions now require expansion to support and create conditions for effective consumer engagement during informal and everyday care tasks. The use of innovative language support tools and cultural considerations are required at the service and system level to support consumer engagement in all types of care interactions. Public and Patient Involvement: The study was embedded within a larger project that included a consumer investigator and was guided by a consumer advisory group (CAG). These consumer team members have lived experience of cancer and are from diverse ethnic backgrounds. CAG members provided feedback on the draft interview guide and participant information for this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An often‐hidden element in healthcare students' education is the pedagogy of public involvement, yet public participation can result in deep learning for students with positive impacts on the public who participate. Objective: This article aimed to synthesize published literature reviews that described the impact of public participation in healthcare students' education. Search Strategy: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, PsychINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the PROSPERO register for literature reviews on public participation in healthcare students' education. Inclusion Criteria: Reviews published in the last 10 years were included if they described patient or public participation in healthcare students' education and reported the impacts on students, the public, curricula or healthcare systems. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted using a predesigned data extraction form and narratively synthesized. Main Results: Twenty reviews met our inclusion criteria reporting on outcomes related to students, the public, curriculum and future professional practice. Discussion and Conclusion: Our findings raise awareness of the benefits and challenges of public participation in healthcare students' education and may inform future research exploring how public participation can best be utilized in higher education. Patient or Public Contribution: This review was inspired by conversations with public healthcare consumers who saw value in public participation in healthcare students' education. Studies included involved public participants, providing a deeper understanding of the impacts of public participation in healthcare students' education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is an embedded practice in clinical research, however, its role in preclinical or laboratory‐based research is less well established and presents specific challenges. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of two key stakeholder groups, preclinical researchers and clinicians on PPI in preclinical research, using spinal cord research as a case study. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted online with 11 clinicians and 11 preclinical researchers all working in the area of spinal cord injury (SCI). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Findings: Nine themes were developed through analysis. Participants' perspectives included that people living with SCI had a right to be involved, that PPI can improve the relevance of preclinical research, and that PPI can positively impact the experiences of researchers. They identified the distance between lab‐based research and the daily experiences of living with SCI to be a barrier and proactive management of accessibility and the motivated and networked SCI community as key facilitators. To develop strong partnerships, participants suggested setting clear expectations, ensuring good communication, and demonstrating respect for the time of PPI contributors involved in the research. Conclusions: While traditionally PPI has been more commonly associated with clinical research, participants identified several potential benefits of PPI in preclinical spinal cord research that have applicability to preclinical researchers more broadly. Preclinical spinal researchers should explore how to include PPI in their work. Patient or Public Contribution: This study was conducted as part of a broader project aiming to develop an evidence base for preclinical PPI that draws on a 5‐year preclinical research programme focused on the development of advanced biomaterials for spinal cord repair as a case study. A PPI Advisory Panel comprising seriously injured rugby players, clinicians, preclinical researchers, and PPI facilitators collaborated as co‐authors on the conceptualisation, design of the interview protocol, data analysis and writing of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In July 2022, self‐collection became universally available as part of Australia's National Cervical Screening Program. This change aims to address screening inequities experienced among underscreened populations, including women of Indian descent. This study explored experiences of cervical screening, alongside the acceptability of self‐collection, among women of Indian descent living in Victoria, Australia. We also aimed to articulate the informational needs to promote self‐collection among this population. Methods: Five focus group discussions with 39 women living in Victoria were conducted in English (n = 3) and Punjabi (n = 2). Transcripts were thematically analysed, as informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Results: Women were motivated by the choice to self‐collect, perceiving the ability to maintain modesty and greater autonomy as key enablers. Healthcare practitioners were seen as central in supporting patient‐centred models of care. Perceived barriers to self‐collection included concerns around its accuracy and women's confidence in collecting their own sample. Widespread dissemination of culturally tailored promotion strategies communicating concepts such as 'privacy' and 'accuracy' were suggested by women to promote self‐collection. Conclusion: Self‐collection was highly acceptable among women of Indian descent, particularly when assured of its accuracy, and sociocultural norms and previous screening experiences are considered. This study highlights the huge potential that self‐collection can play in increasing equity in Australia's cervical screening programme. Patient or Public Contribution: Members of the public were involved in focus group discussions. Findings were summarised and disseminated via a poster. A bicultural worker was involved in all stages of the research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The usual output following health consultations from paediatric services is a clinical letter to the referring professional or primary care provider, with a copy sent to the patient's caregiver. There is little research on how patients and caregivers perceive the letter content. We aimed to: first understand child, young people and caregiver experiences of and preferences for receiving a health feedback letter about the child/young person's health measures within a healthy lifestyle programme; and second to provide a set of recommendations for designing letters to children, young people and their families within a healthy lifestyle programme. Methods: This qualitative study, informed by Kaupapa Māori principles, included focus groups of children aged 5–11 years and young people aged 12–18 years who were participants in a healthy lifestyle programme in Taranaki, Aotearoa New Zealand and of their respective caregivers (total n = 47). Discussions were audio‐recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: Key themes were identified: letters sometimes acted as 'discourses of disempowerment'—some participants experienced a lack of safety, depersonalisation with medical jargon and 'feeling like a number'. Participants described the need for acknowledgement and affirmation in written communication—health feedback should include validation, choice regarding content, respectful tone and a strengths‐based approach to health messages. Interpretation: Letters to referrers, copied to families, can be perceived as disempowering, and participant and caregiver perspectives of content should be considered. This study challenges conventional practice in communicating health feedback with broader implications for written communication in healthcare. We propose separate letters aimed at the child/young person and their caregiver that offer choice in the information they receive. The administrative burden of multiple letters can be mitigated by advances in digital health. Patient Contribution: This study originated in response to feedback from service users that current health feedback was not meeting their needs or expectations. Patient perspectives, especially from children, are rarely considered in the generation of clinic letters from health professionals. Participants were child participants in the community‐based clinical service and their caregivers, and care was taken to represent the demographic backgrounds of service users. Collection and interpretation of Māori data were led by researchers who were local community members to ensure prioritisation and preservation of participant voice. Where possible, results are illustrated in the text by direct quotes from participants, whose identities are protected with a pseudonym. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diagnostic uncertainty is common, but its communication to patients is under‐explored. This study aimed to (1) characterise variation in doctors' communication of diagnostic uncertainty and (2) explore why variation occurred. Methods: Four written vignettes of clinical scenarios involving diagnostic uncertainty were developed. Doctors were recruited from five hospitals until theoretical saturation was reached (n = 36). Participants read vignettes in a randomised order, and were asked to discuss the diagnosis/plan with an online interviewer, as they would with a 'typical patient'. Semi‐structured interviews explored reasons for communication choices. Interview transcripts were coded; quantitative and qualitative (thematic) analyses were undertaken. Results: There was marked variation in doctors' communication: in their discussion about differential diagnoses, their reference to the level of uncertainty in diagnoses/investigations and their acknowledgement of diagnostic uncertainty when safety‐netting. Implicit expressions of uncertainty were more common than explicit. Participants expressed both different communication goals (including reducing patient anxiety, building trust, empowering patients and protecting against diagnostic errors) and different perspectives on how to achieve these goals. Training in diagnostic uncertainty communication is rare, but many felt it would be useful. Conclusions: Significant variation in diagnostic uncertainty communication exists, even in a controlled setting. Differing communication goals—often grounded in conflicting ethical principles, for example, respect for autonomy versus nonmaleficence—and differing ideas on how to prioritise and achieve them may underlie this. The variation in communication behaviours observed has important implications for patient safety and health inequalities. Patient‐focused research is required to guide practice. Patient or Public Contribution: In the design stage of the study, two patient and public involvement groups (consisting of members of the public of a range of ages and backgrounds) were consulted to gain an understanding of patient perspectives on the concept of communicating diagnostic uncertainty. Their feedback informed the formulations of the research questions and the choice of vignettes used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patients living with obesity often experience weight stigma in healthcare settings, which has worrying consequences for their healthcare experiences. This cross‐sectional study aimed to: (1) provide an overview of stigmatising experiences in healthcare settings reported by adults living with varying classes of obesity, (2) identify associations among patient characteristics and perceived weight stigma and (3) investigate the association between perceived weight stigma and person‐centred care (PCC). Methods: Dutch adults living with obesity classes I (body mass index [BMI]: 30 to <35 kg/m2; n = 426), II (BMI: 35 to <40 kg/m2; n = 124) and III (BMI: ≥40 kg/m2; n = 40) completed measures of perceived weight stigma in healthcare settings and PCC. Descriptive, correlational and multivariate analyses were conducted. Results: Of patients living with classes I, II and III obesity, 41%, 59% and 80%, respectively reported experiences of weight stigma in healthcare settings. Younger age, greater obesity severity and the presence of chronic illnesses were associated with greater perceived weight stigma. Greater perceived weight stigma was associated with lower PCC. Conclusion: The results of this study emphasise the significant role of weight stigma in the healthcare experiences of patients living with obesity. Reducing weight stigma is expected to improve PCC and the overall quality of care for these patients. Minimising weight stigma will require efforts across various healthcare domains, including increasing awareness among healthcare professionals about sensitive communication in weight‐related discussions. Patient Contribution: Our sample consisted of patients living with obesity. Additionally, patients were involved in the pilot testing and refinement of the PCC instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Global migration has led to a sharp increase in the number of language‐discordant consultations (LDCs) in healthcare. Evidence on how healthcare providers (HCPs) meet migrant patients' needs while mitigating language barriers is lacking. Design: Using purposive and snowball sampling, we recruited twenty‐seven Dutch HCPs (Mage = 45.07, SD = 11.46) and conducted semi‐structured interviews to collect qualitative, open‐ended data for identifying the communication strategies used with migrant patients in LDCs. We analysed the transcripts using deductive and inductive approaches (e.g., constant comparative method from Grounded Theory). Final pattern codes (i.e., key themes) were discussed among the research team until mutual agreement had been achieved. Results: Five key themes emerged from the analyses: HCPs often 'got‐by' with (1) instrumental and (2) affective communication strategies used in language‐concordant consultations to start medical consultations. When some instrumental communication strategies were deemed ineffective (e.g., lingua franca, gesturing, etc.) to bridge language barriers, HCPs turned to (3) incorporating digital tools (e.g., Google Translate). When HCPs were unable to communicate with migrant patients at all, (4) informal, ad‐hoc and professional interpreters were involved. Finally, HCPs often (5) involved additional support to engage migrant patients to engage in treatment‐related behaviours. Discussion and Conclusions: Our results highlight the importance of raising awareness among HCPs about using various combinations of different strategies. The development of a guideline indicating the optimal combination of communication strategies for different medical consultation goals may be useful in reshaping the current communication behaviour of HCPs in LDCs. Patient or Public Contribution: HCPs were the study population involved in this qualitative study. Refugee health advisors, general practitioners and linguistic specialists (i.e., members of the Right2Health consortium) with experience with the Dutch healthcare system were involved throughout the development of this research. This includes a review of the research question, participant information sheet and interview topic guide as well as providing interpretations of the data and feedback to this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Ethnic minority populations experience significant health and social care disparities; despite experiencing a greater burden of diseases, these groups are underrepresented in health and social care research. Consequently, related research can be less applicable to these population groups. The REPRESENT study aims to explore the health and social care experiences of ethnic minorities and other minoritised populations, their research interests and appropriate research practices. Methods: Focus groups and semistructured interviews were conducted between May and September 2022 with members of a number of ethnic minority communities in England. Data were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically coded using NVivo 12. Rigour was determined through extensive sampling, iterative data collection and analysis. Findings: Fifty‐two ethnic minority members were engaged in group interviews and one‐to‐one interviews. Participants included representatives of the following groups: African Caribbean, Eastern European, Gypsy Travellers, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex and Asexual+, Refugee/Asylum Seekers, Somali and South Asian communities. Interviews were also conducted with ethnic minority healthcare providers and researchers. Three overarching categories were identified: health information, medical service experiences, health and social care concerns and health research. Health and social care services challenges were mostly attributed to discrimination, delayed services, poor cultural relevance and language and cultural barriers. The most influential information sources were local community organisations and word‐of‐mouth. The main health and social care concerns were chronic long‐term health conditions, mental health, maternal health and child development. Recommendations for research involved understanding the motivations for participation, improving communication and empowering communities. Top research priorities were long‐term health conditions, health promotion and education, early care interventions and understanding community needs. Interpretation: Discrimination and bias in health and social care provision have severe implications for worsening ethnic health inequalities. Healthcare commissioning authorities and policymakers can leverage the preference of ethnic minority groups for pharmacy services and community organisations to improve access to care. Improving research interest and engagement requires understanding individual community needs, community sensitivity, research relevance and cultural appropriateness. Patient or Public Contribution: Members of ethnic minority Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group and Community Advisory Board supported the REPRESENT study design, conceptualisation and report development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Creating safer care is a high priority across healthcare systems. Despite this, most systems tend to focus on mitigating past harm, not creating proactive solutions. Managers and staff identify safety threats often with little input from patients and their caregivers during their health encounters. Methods: This is a qualitative descriptive study utilizing focus groups and one‐to‐one interviews with patients and caregivers who were currently using (or had previously used) services in health systems across Canada. Data were analysed via inductive thematic analysis to understand existing and desired strategies to promote safer and better quality care from the perspectives of patients and caregivers. Findings: In our analysis, we identified three key themes (safety strategies) from patients' and caregivers' perspectives and experiences: Using Tools and Approaches for Engaging Patients and Caregivers in their Care; Having Accountability Processes and Mechanisms for Safe Care; and Enabling Patients and Caregivers Access to Information. Conclusions: Safety is more than the absence of harm. Our findings outline a number of suggestions from patients and caregivers on how to make care safer, ranging from being valued on teams, participating as members of quality improvement tables, having access to health information, having access to an advocate to help make sense of information and having processes in place for disclosure and closure. Future work can further refine, implement and evaluate these strategies in practice. Patient or Public Contributions: An advisory group guided the research and was co‐chaired by a patient partner. Members of the advisory group spanned patient and caregiver organizations and health sectors across Canada and included three patient partners and leaders who work closely with patients and caregivers in their day‐to‐day work. In the research itself, we engaged 28 patients and caregivers from across Canada to learn about their safety experiences and learn what safer care looks like from their perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is commonly diagnosed and managed in primary care but there is evidence that this has been suboptimal, with low confidence expressed in providing interventions requiring behaviour change. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptability of a general practitioner (GP)–physiotherapist partnership in the diagnosis and management of COPD in primary care and to explore the experiences of participants during the implementation of the model. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with physiotherapists (n = 3), GPs (n = 2), practice nurses (PNs) (n = 2) and patients (n = 12) who had participated in the InNovaTivE Gp‐physiotheRapist pArTnErship for copD (INTEGRATED) trial. We sought to explore participants' views about their experiences and perceived benefits, barriers and facilitators to the implementation of this model of care. Interviews were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed. Synthesis of the data was guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework for clinician interviews and the health belief model for patient interviews. Results: All clinicians felt that this integrated model helped to optimise care for patients with COPD by facilitating evidence‐based practice. GPs and PNs valued the physiotherapist's knowledge and skills relating to diagnosis and management, which was reported to complement their own management and improve patient outcomes. Patients reported a sense of empowerment following their appointments and acknowledged improved self‐management skills. However, physiotherapists reported many patients were already engaging in positive health behaviours. Responses were mixed on the effectiveness of the model in facilitating teamwork between clinicians with different perspectives concerning management, communication pathways and logistical issues, such as time and room availability, being cited as barriers. Conclusions: An experienced cardiorespiratory physiotherapist embedded into a small number of primary care practices to work in partnership with GPs for COPD diagnosis and management was acceptable and viewed as beneficial for patients. Barriers relating to logistics and resources remain, which must be addressed to optimise implementation. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient input was obtained from qualitative feedback from a prior study conducted by two authors and was used to refine the model of care to determine the added value of a physiotherapist integrated into the primary care team. This feedback was also used to refine the interview guides utilised in this study determine the acceptability of this model of care. We had health service involvement from the rehabilitation service of the local health district who were directly involved in determining study aims and establishing the project around the priorities for their chronic disease integration service. For example, this project aimed to engage with a less severe patient population in primary care who would benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation. The findings from this study will be used to further tailor the model of care to the needs of the public and patients. Trial Registration: ACTRN12619001127190 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Many researchers want to include seldom involved groups, such as refugees and youth, in patient and public involvement (PPI), but experience a number of barriers. The PPI research community calls for critical evaluations that are prospective, data‐based and conducted by researchers and public contributors together. In this study, we conducted a longitudinal evaluation of a core activity in all collaborations: communication strategies. The aim was to evaluate the communication strategies adopted throughout a research project with refugee youth coresearchers. Methods: This article is based on the evaluation of a project where refugee youth were involved in the online adaptation of a group‐based programme for youth with posttraumatic stress. Behavioural observations and field notes collected during the project were analysed with qualitative content analysis and a readability index, and discussed through the lens of epistemic injustice. The article was cowritten by researchers and refugee youth. Findings: Four manifest categories were identified: Facilitating engagement through coplanning and circumstantial flexibility; Different needs require different channels; It's not just about the channel—facilitation skills matter; Finding a common language opens a communicative flow. In addition, a latent underlying theme reflecting the role of trust was identified: Interactive moments facilitate trust—trust facilitates richer involvement. Conclusion: At the core of the identified communication strategies were strengthening relationship‐building and actively facilitating involvement. Establishing trusting relationships enabled refugee youth to share input. The communication strategies increased hermeneutical justice by contributing to a common understanding; thus, taking a step towards ameliorating epistemic injustice. Patient or Public Contribution: This article is a participatory analysis of a PPI process; it was written in collaboration between researchers and refugee youth coauthors, who were all previously involved in the evaluated project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Citizen science is a way to democratise science by involving groups of citizens in the research process. Clinical guidelines are used to improve practice, but their implementation can be limited. Involving patients and the public can enhance guideline implementation, but there is uncertainty about the best approaches to achieve this. Citizen science is a potential way to involve patients and the public in improving clinical guideline implementation. We aimed to explore the application of citizen science methods to involve patients and the public in the dissemination and implementation of clinical guidelines in oral health and dentistry. Methods: We developed GUIDE (GUideline Implementation in oral health and DEntistry), a citizen science online platform, using a participatory approach with researchers, oral health professionals, guideline developers and citizens. Recruitment was conducted exclusively online. The platform focused on prespecified challenges related to oral health assessment guidelines, and asked citizens to generate ideas, as well as vote and comment on other citizens' ideas to improve those challenges. Citizens also shared their views via surveys and two online synchronous group meetings. Data were collected on participant's demographics, platform engagement and experience of taking part. The most promising idea category was identified by an advisory group based on engagement, feasibility and relevance. We presented quantitative data using descriptive statistics and analysed qualitative data using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Results: The platform was open for 6 months and we recruited 189 citizens, from which over 90 citizens actively engaged with the platform. Most citizens were over 34 years (64%), female (58%) and had a university degree (50%). They generated 128 ideas, 146 comments and 248 votes. The challenge that led to most engagement was related to prevention and oral health self‐care. To take this challenge forward, citizens generated a further 36 ideas to improve a pre‐existing National Health Service oral care prevention leaflet. Citizens discussed motivations to take part in the platform (understanding, values, self‐care), reasons to stay engaged (communication and feedback, outputs and impact, and relevance of topics discussed) and suggestions to improve future platforms. Conclusion: Citizen science is an effective approach to generate and prioritise ideas from a group of citizens to improve oral health and dental services. Prevention and oral health self‐care were of particular interest to citizens. More research is needed to ensure recruitment of a diverse group of citizens and to improve retention in citizen science projects. Patient or Public Contribution: This project was inherently conducted with the input of public partners (citizen scientists) in all key aspects of its conduct and interpretation. In addition, two public partners were part of the research team and contributed to the design of the project, as well as key decisions related to its conduct, analysis, interpretation and dissemination and are co‐authors of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This paper provides a critical reflection from both the researcher and public contributor (PC) perspective on the benefits and the learnings taken from involving PCs in research related to Parkinson's. Approach to Patient and Public Involvement (PPI): This paper reports on how PCs shaped the design and development of the PRIME‐UK research programme study materials through input into information leaflets, consent forms and other patient‐facing documents used across three studies within the PRIME‐UK research programme. The PRIME‐UK research programme is designed to improve the quality of life of people with Parkinson's and this project included three studies: a cross‐sectional study, a randomised control trial and a qualitative study. We captured these impacts using Public Involvement Impact Logs, which provide a framework allowing researchers and PCs to report on the learnings, immediate outcomes and impacts from PPI. For this project, the impact logs enabled us to provide reflections from PCs and researchers on the process of involving 'the public' in Parkinson's research. Findings: This paper builds on existing evidence of the range of benefits and challenges that emerge from working with patients and the public in Parkinson's research; this includes reflecting on the changes made to the study materials and benefits for the people involved. Four themes emerged from the reflections that were common to the researchers and PCs; these were the importance of providing a supportive environment; recognition of the benefit of the evaluation of the impact of PPI; acknowledgement that engagement of PPI can make a positive difference to the research process and that timely communication and the use of face‐to‐face communication, where available, is key. Furthermore, we demonstrate how impact logs provide a useful and straightforward tool for evaluating public involvement practices and supporting the feedback process. Conclusion: We offer key recommendations for involving patients and the public in Parkinson's research and suggest approaches that could be implemented to capture the impacts of public involvement. Public Contribution: Public contributors (PCs) were involved in the design and development of the participant information leaflets, consent forms and other patient‐facing documents used for studies within the PRIME‐UK research programme. In addition, PCs evaluated their involvement using impact logs and co‐authored this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) initiatives involving patients with chronic respiratory disease (CRD) are rare. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the perspectives of patients with CRD, carers and interested citizens regarding the relevance and need for a PPI network and suggestions for its implementation. Methods: A qualitative study based on focus groups was conducted. Recruitment occurred through invitations on social media platforms and to patients who have participated in previous asthma studies of the team. Three focus groups were conducted, via video conference, using a semi‐structured guide. Thematic analysis was performed by two independent researchers and discussed with the extended team. Results: Fifteen patients with CRD, one carer and one interested citizen (13 females, median 36 (range: 18–72) years) participated. All participants acknowledged the importance of implementing a collaborative network and demonstrated interest in being integrated. Participants acknowledged the importance of their involvement in several phases of the research cycle. The main aim identified for this network was to facilitate communication between patients and researchers. Participants regarded the integration of patients, carers, researchers and healthcare professionals from different scientific areas as relevant. The use of digital platforms to attract members and support the work, together with group dynamics and regular meetings, were some of the most relevant practical considerations for implementing the network. The identified facilitators for their engagement were sharing experiences, researchers' and healthcare professionals' support and feedback and schedule flexibility. The identified barriers included the amount of time dedicated, low health/digital literacy and the potential detachment of nondiagnosed patients or those with low symptom impact in daily life. Conclusion: Patients, carers and citizens acknowledged the relevance of implementing a collaborative network and demonstrated interest in active participation in every stage of the health research cycle. A deeper knowledge of the barriers and facilitators identified in this study could support implementing these initiatives in Portugal. Patient or Public Contribution: This study was designed by a research team that included one patient with asthma and one carer. They were specifically involved in building the study protocol and the interview guide. They also gave feedback regarding the electronic consent form and the short sociodemographic questionnaire created, namely by removing noncontributing words or phrases and rewording expressions. The lay summary was written by another patient with asthma. All participants of this study were invited to implement and integrate the ConectAR network—a collaborative network of research in respiratory health. Public Summary: In Portugal, chronic respiratory patients do not have an active role as 'coinvestigators'. This study aimed to acknowledge if patients and citizens considered a patient and public involvement network useful, whose main purpose would be to facilitate communication between patients and researchers. A study based on online group interviews was carried out with patients with chronic respiratory diseases and interested citizens, both recruited on social media platforms. Participants considered that bringing together patients, carers, researchers and healthcare professionals is valuable because sharing different experiences and perspectives may help patients to improve their daily lives and increase research quality. In conclusion, patients agree that implementing a collaborative network with researchers and healthcare professionals and participating in the health research cycle is quite preponderant. Acknowledging what can help and deter this network may be beneficial to implementing this type of initiative in Portugal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Adolescents with Type 1 diabetes are a cohort whose self‐management of their diabetes care often declines during adolescence which can lead to adverse health outcomes. Research indicates that providers find it challenging to engage adolescents in communication exchanges during triadic encounters in diabetes clinics. Our study aimed to explore adolescents, parents, and providers' experiences of clinic encounters. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted with a convenience sample of 13 adolescents with Type 1 diabetes (aged 11–17), 14 parents, and seven providers. Participants were recruited from two outpatient diabetes clinics in two urban children's hospitals, Ireland. Data were obtained using a combination of interviews and focus groups. Data were analysed thematically. Results: Adolescents and their parents appeared to hold both positive and negative experiences of diabetes clinic encounters. Providers reported challenges associated with engaging adolescents in communication exchanges. The structure, focus and style of clinic encounters created barriers that potentially led to suboptimal adolescent participation and impaired provider–adolescent communication during clinic visits. Conclusions: The findings provide insights into the challenges associated with adolescents' engagement in communication encounters in diabetes clinics. Healthcare providers could encourage adolescents to be more actively involved in their diabetes management, by taking an adolescent‐centred approach and creating a nonjudgemental milieu. Focusing on adolescent's agenda could lead to more meaningful and relevant discussions between providers and adolescents and ensure more tailored education in the time available. Adolescence is a risky period for nonadherence and adverse health complications; therefore, it is critical that providers make every contact count in diabetes clinic encounters. Patient or Public Involvement: The study's design and delivery were guided by two advisory groups, comprising (1) five adolescents living with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) and (2) five parents of an adolescent with T1D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The implementation and evaluation of patient participation to obtain high‐quality transitional care for older people is an international priority. Intermediate care (IC) services are regarded as an important part of the patient's pathway from the specialist to the primary care levels, bridging the gap between the hospital and the home. Patients may experience varying capacities and conditions for patient participation. Yet, few tools for evaluating patients' preferences for patient participation within IC services are at hand. Accordingly, further knowledge is needed to understand and scaffold processes for patient participation in IC. Therefore, the aim of this project was to translate, validate and pilot test the Patient Preferences for Patient Participation (the 4Ps) with patients in IC services in Norway. Methods: This project comprised two phases: (1) a careful translation and cultural adaptation process, followed by a content validity trial among 15 patients and staff in Norwegian IC and (2) a cross‐sectional survey of the instrument with 60 patients admitted to IC. Results: The translation between Swedish and Norwegian required no conceptual or contextual adaptations. The subsequent cross‐sectional study, designed as a dialogue between the patients and staff, revealed that only 50% of the participants received a sufficient level of patient participation based on their preferences, mostly indicating that patients were receiving less‐than‐preferred conditions for engaging in their health and healthcare issues. Conclusion: The 4Ps instrument was deemed suitable for measuring patient participation based on patient preferences in the IC context and was feasible for both healthcare professionals and patients to complete in an interview when arriving at and leaving services. This may support person‐centred communication and collaboration, calling for further research on what facilitates patient participation and the implementation of person‐centred services for patients in IC. Patient or Public Contribution: First, the current paper is part of the IPIC study (i.e., the implementation of patient participation in IC). Influenced by a James Lind Alliance process, the study addresses research uncertainties identified by patients, next of kin, staff and researchers in the cocreation process. Second, cognitive interviewing was conducted with 15 representatives of the target population: seven patients receiving IC services, one home‐dwelling previous IC patient (altogether four women and four men, most of them 80 years or older) and seven healthcare staff working in IC services. The interviews determined the relevance, comprehensiveness and clarity of the 4Ps. Finally, 60 patients admitted to IC took part in the cross‐sectional study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Testicular cancer is the most common cancer in men aged 15–44 years in many countries. Most men with testicular cancer present with a lump. Testicular symptoms are more likely to occur secondary to benign diseases like epididymo‐orchitis, a common sexually transmitted infection. Gender and sexual minorities are at an increased risk of testicular diseases and health disparities. The aim of this study was to co‐design an inclusive community‐based campaign to promote testicular awareness. Methods: This study uses the World Café methodology. Participation was sought from Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer+ friendly organisations, testicular cancer survivors, health policy makers, media and marketing experts and graphic designers. Participants engaged in three rounds of conversations to co‐design the campaign. Data were collected using drawing sheets, artefact cards, sticky notes, coloured markers and a voice recorder. Deductive thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Seventeen individuals participated in the study. Six themes emerged from the analysis as follows: (i) online communication; (ii) offline communication; (iii) behavioural targeting and education; (iv) campaign frequency and reach; (v) demographic segmentation; and (vi) campaign identity. The use of social media for campaign delivery featured strongly in all conversations. Participants also recommended offline communication using posters and radio/television advertisements to scale up the campaign and achieve wider reach. Advertisements to overcome embarrassment surrounding testicular health were particularly recommended. Participants emphasised that campaign delivery must be dynamic whilst ensuring that the health‐promoting messages are not diluted or lost. They stressed the importance of being inclusive and tailoring the campaign to different age groups, gender identities and sexual orientations. Conclusions: Study recommendations will be used to design and deliver the campaign. Future research will be needed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, cost and effect of the campaign on promoting testicular awareness and early detection of testicular diseases. Patient or Public Contribution: A participatory research approach was used to co‐design the campaign with members of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer+ (LGBTQ+) friendly organisations, LGBTQ+ student bodies, LGBTQ+ staff networks, LGBTQ+ sports clubs, men's health organisations, testicular cancer survivors, health policy makers, media and marketing experts and graphic designers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Liver disease is a growing health concern and a major cause of death. It causes multiple symptoms, including financial, psychological and social issues. To address these challenges, palliative care can support people alongside active treatment, and towards the end of life, but little is known about the care experiences of individuals with liver disease in the United Kingdom. This review aimed to explore the palliative and end‐of‐life care experiences of people with liver disease in the United Kingdom. Method: A systematic review was conducted using a five‐stage process and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines. Searches were across Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and grey literature until 10 May 2023. The review was registered through International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). NVivo 12.5 was used to facilitate data analysis (systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022382649). Results: Of 6035 papers (excluding duplicates) found from searches, five met the inclusion criteria of primary research related to adults with liver disease receiving palliative and/or end‐of‐life care in the United Kingdom, published in English. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data was conducted. The themes identified were the experiences of people with liver disease of relating to healthcare professionals, using services, receiving support, and experiences of information and communication. These were connected by an overarching concept of disempowerment versus empowerment, with the notion of person‐centred care as an important feature. Conclusion: This review has found variations in the care experiences of people with advanced liver disease towards the end of life and an overall lack of access to specialist palliative care services. Where services are designed to be person‐centred, experiences are more empowering. Further research is needed but with recognition that it is often unclear when care for people with liver disease is palliative or end‐of‐life. Patient and Public Contribution: An online public involvement workshop was held on 18 April 2023 through Voice (2023). This included four people with liver disease and four carers to discuss the review findings and to design a qualitative research study to further explore the topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic conditions and multimorbidity, the presence of two or more chronic conditions, are increasingly common in older adults. Effective management of chronic conditions and multimorbidity in older adults requires a collaborative and person‐centred approach that considers the individual's goals, preferences and priorities. However, ensuring high‐quality personalised care for older adults with multimorbidity can be challenging due to the complexity of their care needs, limited time and a lack of patient preparation to discuss their personal goals and preferences with their healthcare team. Objective: To codesign a communication and goal‐setting tool, My Wellbeing Journal, to support personalised care planning for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Design: We drew on an experience‐based codesign approach to develop My Wellbeing Journal. This article reports on the final end‐user feedback, which was collected via an online survey with older adults and their carers. Setting and Participants: Older adults with chronic conditions, multimorbidity and informal carers living in Australia. Personalised care planning was considered in the context of primary care. Results: A total of 88 participants completed the online survey. The survey focused on participants' feedback on the tool in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction and errors encountered. This feedback resulted in modifications to My Wellbeing Journal, which can be used during clinical encounters to facilitate communication, goal setting and progress tracking. Discussion and Conclusions: Clinicians and carers can use the tool to guide discussions with older adults about their care planning and help them set realistic goals that are meaningful to them. The findings of this study could be used to inform the development of recommendations for healthcare providers to implement person‐centred, goal‐oriented care for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Patient or Public Contribution: Older adults living with chronic conditions and multimorbidity and their carers have contributed to the development of a tool that has the potential to significantly enhance the experience of personalised care planning. Their direct involvement as collaborators has ensured that the tool is optimised to meet the standards of effectiveness and usability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Disparities in the uptake of routine and COVID‐19 vaccinations have been observed in migrant populations, and attributed to issues of mistrust, access and low vaccine confidence. Participatory research approaches and behaviour change theory hold the potential for developing tailored vaccination interventions that address these complex barriers in partnership with communities and should be explored further. Methods: This study used a theory‐informed, community‐based participatory research approach to co‐design a culturally tailored behaviour change intervention aimed at increasing COVID‐19 vaccine uptake among Congolese migrants in London, United Kingdom (2021–2022). It was designed and led by a community‐academic partnership in response to unmet needs in the Congolese community as the COVID‐19 pandemic started. Barriers and facilitators to COVID‐19 vaccination, information and communication preferences, and intervention suggestions were explored through qualitative in‐depth interviews with Congolese migrants, thematically analysed, and mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF) and the capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour model to identify target behaviours and strategies to include in interventions. Interventions were co‐designed and tailored in workshops involving Congolese migrants. Results: Thirty‐two Congolese adult migrants (24 (75%) women, mean 14.3 (SD: 7.5) years in the United Kingdom, mean age 52.6 (SD: 11.0) years) took part in in‐depth interviews and 16 (same sample) took part in co‐design workshops. Fourteen barriers and 10 facilitators to COVID‐19 vaccination were identified; most barrier data related to four TDF domains (beliefs about consequences; emotion; social influences and environmental context and resources), and the behavioural diagnosis concluded interventions should target improving psychological capability, reflective and automatic motivations and social opportunities. Strategies included culturally tailored behaviour change techniques based on education, persuasion, modelling, enablement and environmental restructuring, which resulted in a co‐designed intervention comprising community‐led workshops, plays and posters. Findings and interventions were disseminated through a community celebration event. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates how behavioural theory can be applied to co‐designing tailored interventions with underserved migrant communities through a participatory research paradigm to address a range of health issues and inequalities. Future research should build on this empowering approach, with the goal of developing more sensitive vaccination services and interventions which respond to migrant communities' unique cultural needs and realities. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and public involvement (PPI) were embedded in the participatory study design and approach, with community members co‐producing all stages of the study and co‐authoring this paper. An independent PPI board (St George's Migrant Health Research Group Patient and Public Involvement Advisory Board) comprising five adult migrants with lived experience of accessing healthcare in the United Kingdom were also consulted at significant points over the course of the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Indiscriminate use of laboratory blood testing in hospitals contributes to patient discomfort and healthcare waste. Patient engagement in low‐value healthcare can help reduce overuse. Understanding patient experience is necessary to identify opportunities to improve patient engagement with in‐hospital laboratory testing. Objectives: To understand patient experience with the process of in‐hospital laboratory blood testing. Methods: We used a qualitative study design via semistructured interviews conducted online or over the phone. Participants were adult patients or family members/caregivers (≥18 years of age) with a recent (within 12 months of interview) experience of hospitalization in Alberta or British Columbia, Canada. We identified participants through convenience sampling and conducted interviews between May 2021 and June 2022. We analysed transcripts using thematic content analysis. Recruitment was continued until code saturation was reached. Results: We interviewed 16 participants (13 patients, 1 family member and 2 caregivers). We identified four themes from patients' experiences of in‐hospital laboratory blood testing: (i) patients need information from healthcare teams about expected blood testing processes, (ii) blood draw processes should consider patient comfort and preferences, (iii) patients want information from their healthcare teams about the rationale and frequency of blood testing and (iv) patients need information on how their testing results affect their medical care. Conclusion: Current laboratory testing processes in hospitals do not facilitate shared decision‐making and patient engagement. Patient engagement with laboratory testing in hospitals requires an empathetic healthcare team that provides clear communication regarding testing procedures, rationale and results, while considering patient preferences and offering opportunities for involvement. Patient or Public Contribution: We interviewed 16 patients and/or family members/caregivers regarding their in‐hospital laboratory blood testing experiences. Our findings show correlations between patient needs and patient recommendations to make testing processes more patient‐centred. To bring a lived‐experience lens to this study, we formed a Patient Advisory Council with 9–11 patient research partners. Our patient research partners informed the research design, co‐developed participant recruitment strategies, co‐conducted data collection and informed the data analysis. Some of our patient research partners are co‐authors of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reduced health literacy can negatively impact care seeking, satisfaction with care and overall health outcomes. These issues are particularly common among people living with communication difficulties who are seeking care from speech and language therapists (SLTs). As such, the SLT must be aware of and sensitive to health literacy needs within their clinical practice, proactively adapting materials and resources to the health literacy needs of their patients. Despite this required core competency, little is known about the health literacy interventions used by SLTs when working with adult patients, and as such, there is limited and unclear guidance for the practicing clinician, leading to potentially suboptimal care delivery. Objectives: To explore the characteristics of health literacy interventions discussed in the literature for use by SLTs with adult patients. Search Strategy: PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. Conference proceedings of the annual scientific meetings of the European Society for Swallowing Disorders and the Dysphagia Research Society were also searched. Grey literature was searched via the Open Grey database and, hand‐searches of reference lists from included studies were conducted by both authors. Inclusion Criteria: Published and unpublished research investigating health literacy interventions provided by qualified SLTs providing care to adult patients in any setting for any speech and language related concerns. No language, geographic, study design or publication date limitations applied. Eligible participants in these studies were classified as: (1) patients and (2) professionals. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were charted in accordance with guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) independently by both authors. Main Results: A total of 1112 potentially eligible studies were identified in the initial search, with 15 studies ultimately included in the synthesis. Study design and quality varied significantly. Most explored basic functional health literacy or narratively described core components of health literacy, which an SLT should understand, without employing an investigative research design. Discussion: Limited research has been conducted on the use of health literacy interventions within adult speech and language therapy practices. This finding is significant as SLTs regularly work with people living with communication problems, and therefore, addressing health literacy should be a core tenet of service delivery. Conclusion: There is a need for valid, reliable and rigorous investigations of health literacy interventions within speech and language therapy to ultimately improve future patient access to and benefit from the care provided. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient public involvement in review studies is an emerging area. Due to resource issues, it was not possible to include this element in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial explores the use of cofacilitation in health service codesign to address power imbalances and diverse priorities. It highlights the importance of effective facilitation for successful codesign, especially when professional experts lead due to time and budget constraints. It offer ten practical principles for cofacilitation, drawn from their experiences in the CanEngage Project, which aimed to improve cancer care safety for diverse communities.

Aim: This study aimed to develop a patient‐centred handbook that integrates information on lifestyle modifications and psychological support strategies for individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This article provides a comprehensive record of the development process. Methods: We adopted a participatory research model for the methodology, which comprised five phases and involved an interdisciplinary team specializing in dementia and health literacy. Data were initially collected via interviews conducted among patients with MCI (n = 5) and their families (n = 5). Given the study's preliminary nature, depth and richness of the qualitative data were the key concerns for determining the sample size, rather than broad generalizability. We ensured the inclusion of diverse experiences and perspectives by facilitating the creation of patient questions (PQs) that merged scientific evidence with patient perspectives. To enhance the handbook's accessibility and utility, we continuously evaluated the same using patient interviews, health literacy tool assessments and team discussions. This comprehensive approach harmonized scientific knowledge and patient experience, leading to the development of a personalized MCI management guide. Results: The handbook comprises nine domains, encompassing 38 selected PQs: MCI, lifestyle, lifestyle‐related diseases, exercise, nutrition, social participation, cognitive training, psychological care and family support. The health literacy handbook was evaluated based on Clear Communication Index scores. The results revealed that 73.7% of the PQs were deemed difficult prerevision, whereas only 5.3% remained challenging postrevision. The formative evaluation underscored the need for more detailed explanations prerevision, whereas postrevision comments focused primarily on editorial suggestions. Conclusion: The inclusion of patients' perspectives right from the outset ensured that the handbook met their specific needs. The final version, which reflects all stakeholders' inputs, is now slated for imminent publication. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients and the public participated extensively throughout the project, from initial interviews to material evaluation and refinement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: UNderstanding Factors that explain Avoidable hospital admission Inequalities—Research study (UNFAIR) addresses how to reduce health inequalities, particularly for avoidable hospital admissions. Our Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) members broached that health inequalities are complex, challenging to understand and communicate. They identified a need to explore diverse views, including people who have a higher risk of health inequalities. With limited public‐facing resources relating to the public's understanding or emotions around health inequalities, this project aimed to fill this gap using co‐leadership and co‐production. Methods: Members of the public worked with researchers to co‐produce and run PPIE workshops. This project was co‐led by a member of the public and a researcher. One online workshop open to anyone in England accompanied by three face‐to‐face workshops were held. Public contributors, including people living in diverse communities, were invited. Inclusive involvement opportunities were offered including flexible ways of involvement and remuneration. To strengthen the key messages' rigour, transcriptions of the audio‐recordings from each workshop, with facilitator notes, were analysed using thematic analysis. From the key messages, an animation was co‐produced with public contributors with the public's voice being integral throughout. Key Messages: A total of 58 people took part capturing intersecting and multiple dimensions of marginalisation including people with a range of ages, genders, ethnicities, socioeconomic backgrounds, and members of communities who face exclusion (including people with learning difficulties and experiencing ill‐health). The animation highlighted powerful lived experience, for example, some people are dying earlier than expected. Health inequalities conjured up powerful emotions, such as anger and hopelessness. Public views of how to address health inequalities included respecting, accepting and valuing everyone, regardless of, for example, where people live. The animation is publicly available for use by anyone, including decision makers across the health and care system. Conclusions: Through co‐leadership and co‐production, this project is an example of inclusive PPIE. This project provided a way for the public's voice to influence policy and practice to inform understanding and action to address health inequalities. The animation provides powerful insights into what health inequalities mean to people with examples of lived experience and corroborates the moral argument for action by decision makers. Patient and Public Contribution: Members of the public, including people who were affected or at higher risk of health inequalities, co‐led this project and were involved as co‐creators and developers from the inception of the project to completion. Their involvement was integral and documented in full throughout the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Human T‐cell lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV‐1) is a chronic infection affecting 5–10 million people worldwide. Ten percent develop HTLV‐1‐associated diseases, and 3%–5% develop HTLV‐1‐associated myelopathy (HAM)/tropical spastic paraparesis. Low health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) is a significant concern for those with HTLV‐1, and little is known about how it impacts daily life or what patients need from healthcare services. To address this, we report on patient involvement workshops aimed at identifying research priorities for HTLV‐1 health service provision. Methods: Participants recruited through HTLV‐1 clinics in England attended six 90‐min virtual workshops over 10 months, and two 60‐min consolidation workshops. Content developed iteratively from topic focussed group discussions. All workshops were video‐recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Using consensus voting rounds, participants individually ranked their top six and then collectively their top three research priorities from the themes inferred from the analysis. A final feedback session explored the experiences of participating in the workshops. Findings: Twenty‐seven people with HTLV‐1 engaged with the workshops with up to 22 participants attending each meeting. The majority were diagnosed with HAM (n = 22). The top three research priorities were identified as understanding disease progression, psychosocial wellbeing, and information and knowledge. Participants valued being asked to set research priorities that directly addressed their needs and enjoyed the workshops. They stressed the importance of patient advocates for promoting research that positively impacts everyday life. Conclusion: This is the first of this type of research engagement with people with HTLV‐1 in the United Kingdom. Participants identified several avenues of investigation that could lead to improvements in healthcare services and HRQoL. Participants believed the workshops signified the start of a conversation to progress person‐centred and meaningful research in HTLV‐1. Patient or Public Contribution: People living with HTLV‐1 were involved in the iterative design, conduct, analysis, writing and dissemination of this project through the patient involvement workshops. As a result of this engagement, a patient led advisory group has been set up to assist with the dissemination of the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most health systems are insufficiently prepared to promote the participation of chronically ill patients in their care. Strong primary health care (PHC) strengthens patients' resources and thus promotes their participation. The tasks of providing continuous care to people with chronic diseases and promoting self‐management are the responsibility of PHC nurses. Recent research assessing enablers of or barriers to nurses' efforts to support patients' participation has mostly not considered the special situation of patients with chronic diseases or focused on the PHC setting. Objective: To investigate enablers of and barriers to PHC nurses' efforts to promote the participation of chronically ill patients in their care. Methods: We interviewed 34 practicing PHC nurses and 23 key informants with advanced knowledge of PHC nursing practice in Brazil, Germany and Spain. The data was analyzed using thematic coding. Results: We identified four categories of barriers and enablers. (1) Establishing bonds with patients: Interviewees emphasized that understanding patients' views and behaviours is important for PHC nurses. (2) Cooperation with relatives and families: Good relationships with families are fundamental, however conflicts within families could challenge PHC nurses efforts to strengthen participation. (3) Communication and cooperation within PHC teams: PHC nurses see Cooperative team structures as a potential enabler, while the dominance of a 'biomedical' approach to patient care is seen as a barrier. (4) Work environment: Interviewees agreed that increased workload is a barrier to patient participation. Discussion and Conclusions: Supporting patient participation should be acknowledged as an important responsibility for nurses by general practitioners and PHC planners. PHC nurses should be trained in communicative competence when discussing participation with chronically ill patients. Interprofessional education could strengthen other professionals' understanding of patient participation as a nursing task. Patient or Public Contribution: This study is part of a research project associated with the research network 'forges: User‐oriented care: Promotion of health in the context of chronic diseases and care dependency'. The study's focus and provisional results were discussed continuously with partners in health and social care practice and presented to and discussed with the public at two conferences in which patient representatives, professionals and researchers participated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Deaf and hard‐of‐hearing (DHH) patients are a priority population for emergency medicine health services research. DHH patients are at higher risk than non‐DHH patients of using the emergency department (ED), have longer lengths of stay in the ED and report poor patient–provider communication. This qualitative study aimed to describe ED care‐seeking and patient‐centred care perspectives among DHH patients. Methods: This qualitative study is the second phase of a mixed‐methods study. The goal of this study was to further explain quantitative findings related to ED outcomes among DHH and non‐DHH patients. We conducted semistructured interviews with 4 DHH American Sign Language (ASL)‐users and 6 DHH English speakers from North Central Florida. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using a descriptive qualitative approach. Results: Two themes were developed: (1) DHH patients engage in a complex decision‐making process to determine ED utilization and (2) patient‐centred ED care differs between DHH ASL‐users and DHH English speakers. The first theme describes the social‐behavioural processes through which DHH patients assess their need to use the ED. The second theme focuses on the social environment within the ED: patients feeling stereotyped, involvement in the care process, pain communication, receipt of accommodations and discharge processes. Conclusions: This study underscores the importance of better understanding, and intervening in, DHH patient ED care‐seeking and care delivery to improve patient outcomes. Like other studies, this study also finds that DHH patients are not a monolithic group and language status is an equity‐relevant indicator. We also discuss recommendations for emergency medicine. Patient or Public Contribution: This study convened a community advisory group made up of four DHH people to assist in developing research questions, data collection tools and validation of the analysis and interpretation of data. Community advisory group members who were interested in co‐authorship are listed in the byline, with others in the acknowledgements. In addition, several academic‐based co‐authors are also deaf or hard of hearing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Involving consumers in systematic reviews can make them more valuable and help achieve goals around transparency. Systematic reviews are technically complex and training can be needed to enable consumers to engage with them fully. The Cochrane Common Mental Disorders group sought to engage people with lived experience of mental health problems in the Voice of Experience College, three workshops introducing them to systematic review methods and to opportunities to contribute as Cochrane consumers. We aimed to collectively evaluate the College from the perspective of both facilitators and consumers, to critically reflect on the experience, and to identify how the College could be sustained and spread to other review groups. Methods: This study was a longitudinal qualitative and collaborative evaluation, structured around normalisation process theory. Both facilitators and consumers were involved in not only providing their perspectives but also reflecting on these together to identify key learning points. Results: The workshops were positively evaluated as being engaging and supportive, largely due to the relational skills of the facilitators, and their willingness to engage in joint or two‐way learning. The College suffered from a lack of clarity over the role of consumers after the College itself, with a need for greater communication to check assumptions and clarify expectations. This was not achieved due to pandemic disruptions, which nevertheless demonstrated that resources for involvement were not prioritised as core business during this period. Conclusions: Soft skills around communication and support are crucial to effective consumer engagement. Sustaining involvement requires sustained communication and opportunities to reflect together on opportunities and challenges. This requires committed resources to ensure involvement activity is prioritised. This is critical as negative experiences later in the involvement journey can undermine originally positive experiences if contributors are unclear as to what their involvement can lead to. Open discussions about this are necessary to avoid conflicting assumptions. The spread of the approach to other review groups could be achieved by flexibly adapting to group‐specific resources and settings, but maintaining a core focus on collaborative relationships as the key mechanism of engagement. Patient and Public Contribution: Public contributors were collaborators throughout the evaluation process and have co‐authored the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a common assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedure globally, with 8 million children alive today having been conceived utilising IVF. For many patients, IVF is a difficult experience with many discontinuing treatment because of emotional, relationship and financial stress, or intolerable physical side effects of hormone treatments. Design and Participants: A qualitative study, in which 31 professionals and 25 patients from the ART sector in Australia were interviewed. The interviews were analysed using codebook thematic analysis. Results: Our data indicates there are 'silences' within the therapeutic relationship of IVF, which may limit the capacity for patients to prepare emotionally, financially, or medically for the procedure, and may contribute to psychological distress and dissatisfaction with care. These 'silences' include what the patient 'is not told' by their clinician or 'does not hear' and what the patient feels they 'cannot say'. Discussion: Drawing upon the work of Jay Katz, Charis Thompson, and Miles Little on 'silences' and performance in clinical practice, we argue that although IVF is a complex and multifaceted procedure that is often conducted in a commercial setting, the clinical and therapeutic relationship between doctor and patient remains pivotal to the experiences of patients. The 'silences' within this relationship may impact negatively on decision‐making, and on the delivery and experience of care. Conclusions: Careful attention to the realities of IVF treatment in the clinic room (and awareness of the performances that hide them) should allow for more present and compassionate care. Such care may leave patients more satisfied with their experience and their choices, regardless of treatment outcomes. Patient or Public Contribution: This article draws on interviews with patients who had undergone or were currently undergoing IVF, as well as a range of representatives from the ART community (including reproductive medicine specialists, general practitioners, fertility nurses, counsellors, administrators in ART businesses and embryologists). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A large proportion of youth with chronic conditions have mental health comorbidities. However, the effect of these comorbidities on paediatric–adult transition readiness, and the relevance of widely used tools for measuring transition readiness, are unknown. Objective: The objectives of this study were to describe and explore the transition readiness of youth with co‐occurring chronic health and mental health conditions using a combination of quantitative data obtained from participants completing the Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire (TRAQ) and qualitative data. Design and Participants: A three‐phase sequential explanatory mixed methods design was employed, with the qualitative strand taking priority. First, the TRAQ scores (range 1–5) of youth with co‐occurring conditions (n = 61) enroled in a multisite randomized controlled trial were measured, followed by qualitative interviews with a sample of youth (n = 9) to explain the quantitative results. Results from both strands were then integrated, yielding comprehensive insights. Results: Median TRAQ scores ranged from 2.86 on the appointment keeping subscale to 5.00 on the talking with providers subscale. The qualitative results uncovered the complexities faced by this group concerning the impact of a mental health comorbidity on transition readiness and self‐management skills across TRAQ domains. The integrated findings identified a diverse and highly individualized set of strengths and challenges amongst this group that did not align with overarching patterns as measured by the TRAQ. Conclusions: This mixed methods study generated novel understandings about how youth with co‐occurring conditions develop competencies related to self‐care, self‐advocacy and self‐management in preparation for paediatric–adult service transitions. Results demonstrated the assessment of transition readiness using a generic scale does not address the nuanced and complex needs of youth with co‐occurring chronic health and mental health conditions. Our findings suggest tailoring transition readiness practices for this group based on youths' own goals, symptoms, coping mechanisms and resources. Patient or Public Involvement: This study was conducted in collaboration with five young adult research partners (YARP) with lived experience transitioning from paediatric to adult health/mental health services. The YARP's contributions across study phases ensured the perspectives of young people were centred throughout data collection, analysis, interpretation and presentation of findings. All five YARP co‐authored this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with advanced incurable cancer face difficult decisions about palliative treatment options towards their end of life. However, they are often not provided with the appropriate information and support that is needed to make informed decisions. This review aimed to identify contexts and mechanisms associated with communication tools, patient decision‐aids and shared decision‐making (SDM) approaches that influence patient outcomes. Methods: We used a realist review method to search for published studies of patients (adults > 18) with advanced cancer who were expected to make a decision about palliative treatment and/or supportive care in consultation with healthcare practitioners. We appraised and synthesised literature describing the contexts of (when and how) decision aids and SDM approaches are used, and how these contexts interact with mechanisms (resources and reasoning) which impact patient outcomes. Stakeholders including academics, palliative healthcare professionals (HCPs) and people with lived experience of supporting people with advanced incurable cancer contributed to identifying explanatory accounts. These accounts were documented, analysed and consolidated to contribute to the development of a programme theory. Results: From the 33 included papers, we consolidated findings into 20 explanatory accounts to develop a programme theory that explains key contexts and mechanisms that influence patient and SDM. Contexts include underlying patients' and HCPs' attitudes and approaches. These need to be understood in relation to key mechanisms, including presenting information in multiple formats and providing adequate time and opportunities to prepare for and revisit decisions. Contexts influenced mechanisms which then influence the levels of patient decisional satisfaction, conflict and regret. Conclusions: Our programme theory highlights mechanisms that are important in supporting shared treatment decisions for advanced noncurative cancer. The findings are informative for developing and evaluating interventions to improve understanding and involvement in SDM for patients with advanced incurable cancer. Patient and Public Contribution: We included patient and public involvement (PPI) representatives in four stakeholder meetings. PPI helped to define the scope of the review, identify their unique experiences and perspectives, synthesise their perspectives with our review findings, make decisions about which theories we included in our programme theory and develop recommendations for policy and practice and future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite the growing evidence on patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research, little emphasis has been placed on understanding its quality and appropriateness to evidence synthesis (ES) and systematic reviews (SR). This study aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence on the benefits, challenges, and best practices for PPI in ES/SR projects from the perspectives of patients/public and researchers. Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CINAHL Plus. We also searched relevant grey literature and conducted hand‐searching to identify qualitative studies which report the benefits and challenges of PPI in individual ES/SR projects. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers for inclusion and appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute's Qualitative Tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively using thematic synthesis. Results: The literature search retrieved 9923 articles, of which eight studies were included in this review. Five themes on benefits emerged: two from patients'/public's perspective—gaining knowledge, and empowerment; and three from researchers' perspective—enhancing relevance, improving quality, and enhancing dissemination of findings. Six themes on challenges were identified: three from patients'/public's perspective—poor communication, time and low self‐esteem; and three from researchers' perspective—balancing inputs and managing relations, time, and resources and training. Concerning recommendations for best practice, four themes emerged: provision of sufficient time and resources, developing a clear recruitment plan, provision of sufficient training and support, and the need to foster positive working relationships. Conclusion: Highlighting the benefits and challenges of PPI in ES/SR projects from different stakeholder perspectives is essential to understand the process and contextual factors and facilitate meaningful PPI in ES/SR projects. Future research should focus on the utilisation of existing frameworks (e.g., Authors and Consumers Together Impacting on eVidencE [ACTIVE] framework) by researchers to help describe and/or report the best approaches and methods for involving patients/public in ES/SRs projects. Patient and Public Contribution: This review received great contributions from a recognised PPI partner, the Chair of the Cochrane Consumer Network Executive, to inform the final stage of the review (i.e., interpretation, publication and dissemination of findings). The PPI partner has been included as an author of this review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Refugees and migrants face suboptimal involvement in spaces for primary healthcare decision‐making. Given the rising numbers of resettled refugees and migrants in primary care settings in the United States, there is an urgent need for patient‐centred outcome research in practice‐based research networks (PBRNs) with diverse ethnolinguistic communities. This study explored whether researchers, clinicians and patients would achieve consensus on (1) a common set of clinical problems that were applicable across a PBRN and (2) potential clinical interventions to address those problems to inform a patient‐centred outcomes research (PCOR) study in a similar research network. Methods: In this qualitative participatory health research study, patients from diverse ethnolinguistic communities and clinicians from seven practices in a US PBRN discussed preferences for PCOR responsive to patients and the clinicians who serve them in language‐discordant settings. Researchers and an advisory panel that included patients and clinicians from each participating practice held regular advisory meetings to monitor progress on project milestones and solve emerging problems. Participants took part in 10 sessions using Participatory Learning in Action and the World Café methods to identify and prioritise their ideas, using questions set for them by the advisory panel. Data were analysed based on principles of qualitative thematic content analysis. Results: Participants identified common barriers in language‐discordant healthcare settings, principally patient‐clinician communication barriers and suggestions to overcome these barriers. A key finding was an unanticipated consensus about the need for attention to healthcare processes rather than a clinical research priority. Negotiation with research funders enabled further analysis of potential interventions for care processes to improve communication and shared decision‐making in consultations and the practice as a whole. Conclusion: PCOR studies should examine interventions for improving communication between patients from diverse ethnolinguistic communities and primary care staff if the sorts of harms experienced by patients experiencing language‐discordant healthcare are to be reduced or prevented. Flexibility and responsiveness from funders to unanticipated findings are key structural supports for participatory health research in primary care clinical settings with this population and others who experience marginalisation and exclusion. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients and clinicians participated in the study both in the formulation of the study question, data collection, analysis and dissemination of these results; consented to their individual participation; and reviewed early drafts of the manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Peer‐to‐peer communication approaches have been previously described as the 'power of personal referral'. Rather than relying on official channels of information, peer‐to‐peer communication may have a role in supporting changes in understanding and possibly behaviours. However, in emergency or pandemic situations, there is currently limited understanding of whether community members feel comfortable speaking about their vaccine experiences or advocating to others. This study explored the perceptions of COVID‐19 vaccinated and unvaccinated Australian adults regarding their preferences and opinions about peer‐peer communication and other vaccine communication strategies. Study Design: Qualitative interview research. Methods: In‐depth interviews were conducted in September 2021 with 41 members of the Australian community. Thirty‐three participants self‐identified as being vaccinated against COVID‐19, while the remainder were not vaccinated at the time or did not intend on receiving a COVID vaccine. Results: Amongst those who were vaccinated, participants spoke about being willing to promote the vaccine and correct misinformation and felt empowered following their vaccination. They highlighted the importance of peer‐to‐peer communication and community messaging, expressing the need for both strategies in an immunisation promotional campaign, with a slight emphasis on the persuasive power of communication between family and friends. However, those who were unvaccinated tended to dismiss the role of community messaging, commenting on a desire not to be like one of the many who listened to the advice of others. Conclusion: During emergency situations, governments and other relevant community organisations should consider harnessing peer‐to‐peer communication amongst motivated individuals as a health communication intervention. However further work is needed to understand the support that this constituent‐involving strategy requires. Patient or Public Contribution: Participants were invited to participate through a series of online promotional pathways including emails and social media posts. Those who completed the expression of interest and met the study criteria were contacted and sent the full study participant information documentation. A time for a 30 min semi‐structured interview was set and provided with a $50 gift voucher at the conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]