Search

In Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR), people with shared lived experiences (co-researchers) identify priority needs and work collaboratively to co-design an action-oriented research advocacy project. For this to occur, academic researchers must build mutually respectful partnerships with co-researchers by establishing trust. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, our objective was to virtually assemble a group of co-researchers (people with diverse but relevant experiences of homelessness and diabetes) and academic researchers who engaged in the CBPR process to identify a project that would address the difficulties of diabetes management while experiencing homelessness. Co-researchers were recruited to the committee from community homeless-serving organizations. Six co-researchers, one peer researcher and three academic researchers from Calgary, Alberta met virtually for bi-weekly committee meetings, from June 2021 to May 2022 to explore barriers to diabetes management and to complete a priority-setting exercise to determine the focus of our collective project. After reflecting on our virtual CBPR experience we present lessons learned related to: i) technical challenges and logistical considerations, ii) meeting virtually and building rapport, iii) driving engagement, and iv) challenges of transitioning from virtual to in-person meeting format. Overall, the process of conducting a CBPR project virtually to engage a group of co-researchers during a pandemic presents its challenges. However, a virtual CBPR project is feasible and can lead to meaningful experiences that benefit all group members, both from the community and academia. Plain English summary: In Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR), we value peoples' lived experiences as knowledge and believe that it can help in the design of research projects. In these projects, people with similar lived experiences work with researchers to design a research advocacy project that will make meaningful changes in their community. Trust and respect between all team members are essential for working well together. Establishing trust and respect can be difficult, especially when done virtually. We virtually convened a committee and completed a CBPR project. Our group consisted of seven people with lived experience of diabetes and homelessness and three academic researchers in Calgary, Alberta. We met every two weeks between June 2021 and May 2022 to explore possible topics for our CBPR project, which we narrowed down to their top priority. As we reflected on our experience of working together, we came up with four categories of lessons learned: i) technical challenges, ii) building rapport, iii) driving engagement, and iv) challenges of transitioning from virtual to in-person meeting format. While our experience presented its challenges, we found working virtually to create a CBPR project is possible and can be meaningful for all group members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR), people with shared lived experiences (co-researchers) identify priority needs and work collaboratively to co-design an action-oriented research advocacy project. For this to occur, academic researchers must build mutually respectful partnerships with co-researchers by establishing trust. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, our objective was to virtually assemble a group of co-researchers (people with diverse but relevant experiences of homelessness and diabetes) and academic researchers who engaged in the CBPR process to identify a project that would address the difficulties of diabetes management while experiencing homelessness. Co-researchers were recruited to the committee from community homeless-serving organizations. Six co-researchers, one peer researcher and three academic researchers from Calgary, Alberta met virtually for bi-weekly committee meetings, from June 2021 to May 2022 to explore barriers to diabetes management and to complete a priority-setting exercise to determine the focus of our collective project. After reflecting on our virtual CBPR experience we present lessons learned related to: i) technical challenges and logistical considerations, ii) meeting virtually and building rapport, iii) driving engagement, and iv) challenges of transitioning from virtual to in-person meeting format. Overall, the process of conducting a CBPR project virtually to engage a group of co-researchers during a pandemic presents its challenges. However, a virtual CBPR project is feasible and can lead to meaningful experiences that benefit all group members, both from the community and academia. Plain English summary: In Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR), we value peoples' lived experiences as knowledge and believe that it can help in the design of research projects. In these projects, people with similar lived experiences work with researchers to design a research advocacy project that will make meaningful changes in their community. Trust and respect between all team members are essential for working well together. Establishing trust and respect can be difficult, especially when done virtually. We virtually convened a committee and completed a CBPR project. Our group consisted of seven people with lived experience of diabetes and homelessness and three academic researchers in Calgary, Alberta. We met every two weeks between June 2021 and May 2022 to explore possible topics for our CBPR project, which we narrowed down to their top priority. As we reflected on our experience of working together, we came up with four categories of lessons learned: i) technical challenges, ii) building rapport, iii) driving engagement, and iv) challenges of transitioning from virtual to in-person meeting format. While our experience presented its challenges, we found working virtually to create a CBPR project is possible and can be meaningful for all group members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Indigenous women experience structural barriers to wellness rooted in colonialism and related socio-political processes, making participation in physical activity and access to balanced nutrition challenging. In response, a holistic wellness program was developed in Lloydminster, Alberta, Canada. Multiple program iterations have since been completed in urban and rural including reserve) settings across Alberta: in Onion Lake Cree Nation, in, Lloydminster, and in Calgary. The program includes physical activity, nutrition education, access to local healthcare support, and sharing circles to facilitate reflection. This article collates three years of qualitative data between programs to answer the question: "What does the program do?" Methods Between 2017 and 2019, 24 participants, four facilitators, and three community champions completed post-program interviews. mixed-methods, qualitative, two-part analysis was completed involving thematic analysis of transcripts followed by a structured consensus-building approach called nominal group technique (NGT). Results Collaborative analyses revealed that the program enables: 1) self-actualization through collective effort, including development of knowledge, skills, beliefs, and behaviours needed to manage one's own health, 2) improved personal wellness, and 3) access to social and cultural supports. Cultural relevancy and safety were identified as key elements in the context that supported these changes. Conclusion The wellness program for Indigenous women demonstrates positive impacts on the health and wellbeing of participants. Benefits naturally extend to participants' families, as well as to communities involved through capacity-building. Alongside the education and resources offered, the program environment also contributes to this positive impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The NHS Community Pharmacist Consultation Service (CPCS) offers patients requiring urgent care a consultation with a community pharmacist, following referral from general practice or urgent care. The study explored the impact of undertaking a Centre for Pharmacy Postgraduate Education (CPPE) CPCS learning programme, and barriers and enablers to CPCS delivery. Methods: CPPE distributed an online survey to those who had undertaken their CPCS learning. The survey explored participants' knowledge, confidence and application of taught skills/tools, including clinical history-taking, clinical assessment, record keeping, transfer of care, and Calgary-Cambridge, L(ICE)F and SBARD communication tools. Details on barriers and enablers to CPCS delivery were also included. Results: One-hundred-and-fifty-nine responses were received (response rate 5.6%). Knowledge of, and confidence in, taught skills were high and respondents reported applying skills in CPCS consultations and wider practice. Barriers to CPCS included a lack of general practice referrals, staffing levels, workload, and GP attitudes. Enablers included a clear understanding of what was expected, minimal concerns over indemnity cover and privacy, and positive patient attitudes towards pharmacy. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that community pharmacists can extend their practice and contribute to the enhanced provision of urgent care in England. This study identified barriers, both interpersonal and infrastructural, that may hinder service implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]