1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The value of involving patients and public in health services research and evaluation: a qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Public and Patient Involvement, Engagement and Participation research encompasses working with patients/service users (people with a medical condition receiving health service treatment), public members, caregivers and communities (who use services or care for patients). The Partner Priority Programme (PPP) was developed by the National Health Service [NHS] and National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care [NIHR CLAHRC] NWC to share information and experience on evaluating new services being offered to patients that were seeking to reduce health inequalities, improve people’s health and wellbeing and reduce emergency hospital admissions. This paper seeks to explore an approach developed for involving the public as equal partners within the evaluation and decision-making processes of health and social care services research. The aim of this study was to identify how public advisors were included, the impact of their involvement, and how change occurred within the organisations following their involvement.

          Methods

          A qualitative approach using focus group discussions was adopted to explore the experiences of two cohorts of participants involved in PPP project teams. Focus groups were held with public advisors ( n = 9), interns (n = 9; staff or public who received a funded internship for a PPP project), NHS and Local Authority initiative leads ( n = 10), and academic facilitators ( n = 14). These were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach.

          Results

          Thirty-two public advisors were recruited to support 25 PPP projects across the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and CLAHRC North West Coast [NWC] partner organisations. Three inter-related themes were conceptualised: 1) “Where it all started - involving public advisors” identified the varying journeys to recruitment and experiences of becoming a public advisor; 2) “Steps toward active involvement and engagement” related to public advisors becoming core team members; and 3) “Collaborative working to enhance public and patient involvement” relayed how projects identified the benefits of working jointly with the public advisors, particularly for those who had not experienced this style of working before.

          Conclusions

          The findings indicate that the PPP model is effective for embedding Public and Patient Involvement [PPI] within health services research, and recommends that PPI is integrated at the earliest opportunity within research projects and service evaluations through the use of support-led and facilitative programmes.

          Plain English Summary

          The purpose of involving the public and patients in research is to help them have a say in decisions about healthcare and enable patients or other people with relevant experience to contribute to how research is planned, carried out, and shared with a wider audience. The Partner Priority Programme (PPP) was developed by the National Health Service [NHS] and Local Authority partners to share information and experience on evaluating new services being offered to patients that were seeking to reduce health inequalities, improve people’s health and wellbeing and reduce emergency hospital admissions. In this paper, we explore an approach we developed for involving public advisors (service users/patients, and caregivers) as equal partners within the evaluation and decision-making processes of health and social care services research. The aim of this study was to identify how public advisors were included, the impact of their involvement, and identify the changes organisations made as a result of public advisor involvement. Most projects had not included public advisors in their teams before and initially did not understand how to involve them. By attending scheduled meetings, they had time to learn how to engage with public advisors (and what methods to use to recruit them to be part of their teams). Participants also learned the benefits of including public advisors within their teams. With the help and support provided as part of the programme, public advisors seemed to grow in confidence and take part in teams as equal partners.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Communities of practice

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Developing and implementing a triangulation protocol for qualitative health research.

              In this article, the authors present an empirical example of triangulation in qualitative health research. The Canadian Heart Health Dissemination Project (CHHDP) involves a national examination of capacity building and dissemination undertaken within a series of provincial dissemination projects. The Project's focus is on the context, processes, and impacts of health promotion capacity building and dissemination. The authors collected qualitative data within a parallel-case study design using key informant interviews as well as document analysis. Given the range of qualitative data sets used, it is essential to triangulate the data to address completeness, convergence, and dissonance of key themes. Although one finds no shortage of admonitions in the literature that it must be done, there is little guidance with respect to operationalizing a triangulation process. Consequently, the authors are feeling their way through the process, using this opportunity to develop, implement, and reflect on a triangulation protocol.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                P.Saini@ljmu.ac.uk
                Journal
                Res Involv Engagem
                Res Involv Engagem
                Research Involvement and Engagement
                BioMed Central (London )
                2056-7529
                29 June 2021
                29 June 2021
                2021
                : 7
                : 49
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.4425.7, ISNI 0000 0004 0368 0654, School of Psychology, Tom Reilly Building, , Liverpool John Moores University, ; Liverpool, L3 3AF UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.10025.36, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8470, University of Liverpool, NIHR ARC NWC, ; Liverpool, UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.8391.3, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8024, Exeter University Business School, ; Exeter, UK
                [4 ]ARC NWC Public Advisor, Liverpool, UK
                [5 ]GRID grid.466479.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0478 4164, North West Boroughs Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, ; Winwick, UK
                [6 ]GRID grid.10025.36, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8470, University of Liverpool, ; Liverpool, UK
                [7 ]GRID grid.9835.7, ISNI 0000 0000 8190 6402, Lancaster University, NIHR CLAHRC NWC, ; Lancaster, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4981-7914
                Article
                289
                10.1186/s40900-021-00289-8
                8244227
                34187590
                1fe03672-fb38-4073-811d-7a63b82a965f
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 2 May 2020
                : 30 May 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                public and patient involvement,capacity building,participation,partnership,collaborative working,coproduction

                Comments

                Comment on this article