Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in the PCORI Pilot Projects: Description and Lessons Learned

Laura P Forsythe, Lauren E Ellis, Lauren Edmundson, Raj Sabharwal, Alison Rein, Kristen Konopka, Lori Frank, Laura P Forsythe, Lauren E Ellis, Lauren Edmundson, Raj Sabharwal, Alison Rein, Kristen Konopka, Lori Frank

Abstract

Background: Patients and healthcare stakeholders are increasingly becoming engaged in the planning and conduct of biomedical research. However, limited research characterizes this process or its impact.

Objective: We aimed to characterize patient and stakeholder engagement in the 50 Pilot Projects funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), and identify early contributions and lessons learned.

Design: A self-report instrument was completed by researchers between 6 and 12 months following project initiation.

Participants: Forty-seven principal investigators or their designees (94 % response rate) participated in the study. MAIN MEASURES Self-report of types of stakeholders engaged, stages and levels of engagement, facilitators and barriers to engagement, lessons learned, and contributions from engagement were measured.

Key results: Most (83 %) reported engaging more than one stakeholder in their project. Among those, the most commonly reported groups were patients (90 %), clinicians (87 %), health system representatives (44 %), caregivers (41 %), and advocacy organizations (41 %). Stakeholders were commonly involved in topic solicitation, question development, study design, and data collection. Many projects engaged stakeholders in data analysis, results interpretation, and dissemination. Commonly reported contributions included changes to project methods, outcomes or goals; improvement of measurement tools; and interpretation of qualitative data. Investigators often identified communication and shared leadership strategies as "critically important" facilitators (53 and 44 % respectively); lack of stakeholder time was the most commonly reported challenge (46 %). Most challenges were only partially resolved. Early lessons learned included the importance of continuous and genuine partnerships, strategic selection of stakeholders, and accommodation of stakeholders' practical needs.

Conclusions: PCORI Pilot Projects investigators report engaging a variety of stakeholders across many stages of research, with specific changes to their research attributed to engagement. This study identifies early lessons and barriers that should be addressed to facilitate engagement. While this research suggests potential impact of stakeholder engagement, systematic characterization and evaluation of engagement at multiple stages of research is needed to build the evidence base.

Keywords: comparative effectiveness research (CER); patient engagement; patient-centered outcomes research.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Types of stakeholders engaged in the PCORI pilot projects (among those projects who reported any engagement, n = 39).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Stages of the research project in which patients were engaged (among PCORI pilot project investigators reporting engagement of patients, n = 34).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Facilitators of engaging patients and other stakeholders in research (among PCORI pilot projects reporting any engagement, n = 36).

References

    1. Concannon TW, Fuster M, Saunders T, Patel K, Wong JB, Leslie LK, et al. A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(12):1692–701. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2878-x.
    1. Deverka PA, Lavallee DC, Desai PJ, Esmail LC, Ramsey SD, Veenstra DL, et al. Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement. J Comp Eff Res. 2012;1(2):181–94. doi: 10.2217/cer.12.7.
    1. Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, Nabhan M, et al. Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect. 2013.
    1. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). The PCORI Methodology Report. 2013. Available at: Accessed June 9, 2015.
    1. Mullins CD, Abdulhalim AM, Lavallee DC. Continuous patient engagement in comparative effectiveness research. JAMA. 2012;307(15):1587–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.442.
    1. Hanley B, Bradburn J, Barnes M, Evans C, Goodare H, Kelson M, et al. Involving the public in NHS public health, and social care research: briefing notes for researchers. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2004.
    1. Macaulay AC, Commanda LE, Freeman WL, Gibson N, McCabe ML, Robbins CM, et al. Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. North American primary care research group. BMJ. 1999;319(7212):774–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774.
    1. Green LW, Mercer SL. Can public health researchers and agencies reconcile the push from funding bodies and the pull from communities? Am J Public Health. 2001;91(12):1926–9. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.91.12.1926.
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR). Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Patient Engagement Framework. 2015. Available at: . Accessed Apr 7, 2015.
    1. Sarrami Foroushani P, Travaglia J, Eikli M, Braithwaite J. Consumer and Community Engagement: A review of the literature. 2012. Available at: . Accessed Apr 7, 2015.
    1. Viswanathan M, Ammerman A, Eng E, Garlehner G, Lohr KN, Griffith D, et al. Community-based participatory research: assessing the evidence. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2004(99):1–8.
    1. Whitlock EP, Lopez SA, Chang S, Helfand M, Eder M, Floyd N. AHRQ series paper 3: identifying, selecting, and refining topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews: AHRQ and the effective health-care program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(5):491–501. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.03.008.
    1. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Voice of the Patient: A Series of Reports from FDA's Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative. 2014. Available at: . Accessed June 9, 2015.
    1. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI). From Public Advocacy to Research Priorities: NHLBI Listens and Responds. 2004. Available at: . Accessed June 9, 2015.
    1. National Institutes of Health. Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA): Communities & Research. 2015. Available at: . Accessed June 11, 2015.
    1. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. no. 111–148, 124 Stat. 727, Sect. 6301.
    1. Frank L, Basch E, Selby JV. Patient-centered outcomes research I. The PCORI perspective on patient-centered outcomes research. JAMA. 2014;312(15):1513–4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.11100.
    1. Forsythe LP, Szydlowski V, Murad MH, Ip S, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, et al. A systematic review of approaches for engaging patients for research on rare diseases. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(Suppl 3):S788–800. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2895-9.
    1. Boote J, Baird W, Sutton A. Public involvement in the design and conduct of clinical trials: a narrative review of case examples. Trials. 2011;12(Suppl 1):A82. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-S1-A82.
    1. Boote J, Baird W, Sutton A. Involving the public in systematic reviews: a narrative review of organizational approaches and eight case examples. J Comp Eff Res. 2012;1(5):409–20. doi: 10.2217/cer.12.46.
    1. Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, Herron-Marx S, Hughes J, Tysall C, et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expect. 2014;17(5):637–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x.
    1. Staley K. Exploring impact: public involvement in NHS, public health, and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2009.
    1. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Mockford C, Barber R. The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27(4):391–9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000481.
    1. Workman T, Maurer M, Carman K. Unresolved tensions in consumer engagement in CER: a US research perspective. J Comp Eff Res. 2013;2(2):127–34. doi: 10.2217/cer.13.6.
    1. Esmail L, Moore E, Rein A. Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice. J Comp Eff Res. 2015;4(2):133–45. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.79.
    1. Barber R, Boote JD, Cooper CL. Involving consumers successfully in NHS research: a national survey. Health Expect. 2007;10(4):380–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00457.x.
    1. Hanley B, Truesdale A, King A, Elbourne D, Chalmers I. Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey. BMJ. 2001;322(7285):519–23. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.519.
    1. Qualtrics Software, Version 57764. Provo, UT: Qualtrics Research Suite; 2014.
    1. Frank L, Forsythe L, Ellis L, Schrandt S, Sheridan S, Gerson J, et al. Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(5):1033–41. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0893-3.
    1. Mitton C, Smith N, Peacock S, Evoy B, Abelson J. Public participation in health care priority setting: a scoping review. Health Policy. 2009;91(3):219–28. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.01.005.
    1. Mallery C, Ganachari D, Fernandez J, Smeeding L, Robinson S, Moon M, et al. Innovative Methods in Stakeholder Engagement: An Environmental Scan. Prepared by the American Institutes for Research under contract No. HHSA 290 2010 0005 C. AHRQ Publication NO. 12-EHC097-EF. Rockville, MD2012.
    1. McKenzie A, Hanley B. Consumer and Community Participation in Health and Medical Research: A Practical Guide for Health and Medical Research Organizations. Australia The University of Western Australia and The Telethon Institute for Child Research; 2009.
    1. Minogue V, Girdlestone J. Building capacity for service user and carer involvement in research: the implications and impact of best research for best health. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2010;23(4):422–35. doi: 10.1108/09526861011037470.
    1. Lopez MH, Holve E, Rein A, Winkler J. Involving Patients and Consumers in Research: New Opportunites for Meaningful Engagement in Research and Quality Improvement. EDM Forum, AcademyHealth. June 2012.
    1. Saunders C, Crossing S, Girgis A, Butow P, Penman A. Operationalising a model framework for consumer and community participation in health and medical research. Aust New Zealand Health Policy. 2007;4:13. doi: 10.1186/1743-8462-4-13.
    1. Stacciarini JM, Shattell MM, Coady M, Wiens B. Review: community-based participatory research approach to address mental health in minority populations. Community Ment Health J. 2011;47(5):489–97. doi: 10.1007/s10597-010-9319-z.
    1. Stewart RJ, Caird J, Oliver K, Oliver S. Patients’ and clinicians’ research priorities. Health Expect. 2011;14(4):439–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00648.x.
    1. Curtis P, Slaughter-Mason S, Thielke A, Gordon C, Pettinari C, Ryan K, et al. PCORI Expert Interviews Project: Final Report. Portland, OR 2012.
    1. Forsythe LP, Frank L, Walker KO, Anise A, Wegener N, Weisman H, et al. Patient and Clinician Views on Comparative Effectiveness Research and Engagement in Research. J Comp Eff Res. in press.
    1. Oliver S, Clarke-Jones L, Rees R, Milne R, Buchanan P, Gabbay J, et al. Involving consumers in research and development agenda setting for the NHS: developing an evidence-based approach. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(15):1–148. doi: 10.3310/hta8150.
    1. Westfall JM, Fagnan LJ, Handley M, Salsberg J, McGinnis P, Zittleman LK, et al. Practice-based research is community engagement. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(4):423–7. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.04.090105.
    1. Caron-Flinterman JF, Broerse JE, Bunders JF. The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research? Soc Sci Med. 2005;60(11):2575–84. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.023.
    1. Domecq JP, Prutsky G, Elraiyah T, Wang Z, Nabhan M, Shippee N, et al. Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-89.
    1. Garces JPD LG, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, Nabham M, Campana JPB, et al. Eliciting Patient Perspective in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research: A Meta Narrative Systematic Review. Mayo Clinic, Rochester. 2012. Available at: . Accessed June 9, 2015.
    1. Nilsen ES, Myrhaug HT, Johansen M, Oliver S, Oxman AD. Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:CD004563.
    1. Staniszewska S, Jones N, Newburn M, Marshall S. User involvement in the development of a research bid: barriers, enablers and impacts. Health Expect. 2007;10(2):173–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00436.x.
    1. Lophatananon A, Tyndale-Biscoe S, Malcolm E, Rippon HJ, Holmes K, Firkins LA, et al. The James Lind alliance approach to priority setting for prostate cancer research: an integrative methodology based on patient and clinician participation. BJU Int. 2011;108(7):1040–3. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10609.x.
    1. Lindenmeyer A, Hearnshaw H, Sturt J, Ormerod R, Aitchison G. Assessment of the benefits of user involvement in health research from the Warwick diabetes care research user group: a qualitative case study. Health Expect. 2007;10(3):268–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00451.x.
    1. Edwards V, Wyatt K, Logan S, Britten N. Consulting parents about the design of a randomized controlled trial of osteopathy for children with cerebral palsy. Health Expect. 2011;14(4):429–38. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00652.x.
    1. Terry SF, Terry PF, Rauen KA, Uitto J, Bercovitch LG. Advocacy groups as research organizations: the PXE international example. Nat Rev Genet. 2007;8(2):157–64. doi: 10.1038/nrg1991.
    1. Barber R, Beresford P, Boote J, Cooper C, Faulkner A. Evaluating the impact of service user involvement on research: a prospective case study. Int J Consum Stud. 2011;35(6):609–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01017.x.
    1. Fern LA, Taylor RM, Whelan J, Pearce S, Grew T, Brooman K, et al. The art of age-appropriate care: reflecting on a conceptual model of the cancer experience for teenagers and young adults. Cancer Nurs. 2013;36(5):E27–e38. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0b013e318288d3ce.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner