Development and evaluation of a virtual patient-centered outcomes research training program for the cystic fibrosis community

Emily M Godfrey, Erin K Thayer, Laura Mentch, Traci M Kazmerski, Georgia Brown, Molly Pam, Morhaf Al Achkar, Emily M Godfrey, Erin K Thayer, Laura Mentch, Traci M Kazmerski, Georgia Brown, Molly Pam, Morhaf Al Achkar

Abstract

Background: Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) emphasizes patient-generated research priorities and outcomes, and engages patients throughout every stage of the research process. In the cystic fibrosis (CF) community, patients frequently provide input into research studies, but rarely are integrated onto research teams. Therefore, we developed and evaluated a virtual pilot PCOR training program to build PCOR capacity in the CF community (patients, caregivers, researchers, nonprofit stakeholders and providers). We aimed to show changes among participants' perceived PCOR knowledge (a.k.a PCOR knowledge), confidence in engaging stakeholders, and post-training session satisfaction.

Methods: Guided by a prior CF community educational needs assessment, our researcher and patient-partner team co-developed a four-part virtual online training program. We structured the program towards two learner groups: patients/caregivers and researchers/providers. We evaluated participants' PCOR knowledge, confidence in engaging stakeholders, and session satisfaction by administering 5-point Likert participant surveys. We tested for significant differences between median ratings pre- and post-training.

Results: A total of 28 patients/caregivers, and 31 researchers/providers participated. For both learner groups, we found the training resulted in significantly higher PCOR knowledge scores regarding "levels of engagement" (p = .008). For the patient/caregiver group, training significantly increased their PCOR knowledge about the barriers/enablers to doing PCOR (p = .017), effective PCOR team elements (p = .039), active participation (p = .012), and identifying solutions for successful PCOR teams (p = .021). For the researcher/healthcare provider group, training significantly increased participants' ability to describe PCOR core principles (p = .016), identify patient-partners (p = .039), formulate research from patient-driven priorities (p = .039), and describe engagement in research grants (p = .006). No learner group had significant changes in their confidence score. Most participants were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the training program.

Conclusions: Overall, our virtual pilot PCOR training program was well received by patients, caregivers, researchers and providers in the CF community. Participants significantly improved their perceived knowledge with core PCOR learning items. Trial registration Retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04999865).

Keywords: Co-development; Cystic fibrosis; Education; Evaluation; Patient engagement; Patient involvement; Patient-centered outcomes research; Training.

Conflict of interest statement

Dr. Emily M. Godfrey is a Nexplanon trainer for Merck, outside the submitted work. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Adapted Model For Improvement framework to build patient-centered outcomes research capacity in the cystic fibrosis community
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PCOR training development activities Feb 2019-Jul 2020
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Satisfaction with the interactive training session format, by participant type

References

    1. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry 2019 Annual Data Report. Bethesda: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation; 2020.
    1. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. Community voice brings your voice into everything that we do. Bethesda: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation; 2017 [Descrption of Community Voice]. .
    1. Cystic Fibrosis Research Inc. Research for living partners for life 2018. .
    1. Kwon SC, Tandon SD, Islam N, Riley L, Trinh-Shevrin C. Applying a community-based participatory research framework to patient and family engagement in the development of patient-centered outcomes research and practice. Transl Behav Med. 2018;8(5):683–691. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx026.
    1. Saiman L, Siegel J. Infection control recommendations for patients with cystic fibrosis: microbiology, important pathogens, and infection control practices to prevent patient-to-patient transmission. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003;24(5 Suppl):S6–52. doi: 10.1086/503485.
    1. Largent EA, Weissman JS, Gupta A, Abraham M, Rozenblum R, Lynch HF, et al. Patient-centered outcomes research: stakeholder perspectives and ethical and regulatory oversight issues. IRB. 2018;40(1):7–17. doi: 10.1002/eahr.401002.
    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):1692–1701. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2878-x.
    1. Forsythe LP, Frank LB, Workman TA, Borsky A, Hilliard T, Harwell D, et al. Health researcher views on comparative effectiveness research and research engagement. J Comp Eff Res. 2017;6(3):245–256. doi: 10.2217/cer-2016-0063.
    1. Hughes P, Grace B. Gracious Space: Working Together Better. CEL Publications; 2010.
    1. Gafni A, Charles C. The physician-patient encounter: an agency relationship. Shared decision-making in health care achieving evidence-based patient choice. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009. pp. 73–78.
    1. Jimenez XF. Attachment in medical care: a review of the interpersonal model in chronic disease management. Chronic Illn. 2017;13(1):14–27. doi: 10.1177/1742395316653454.
    1. Sacristán JA, Aguarón A, Avendaño-Solá C, Garrido P, Carrión J, Gutiérrez A, et al. Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how. Patient Prefer Adher. 2016;10:631–640. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S104259.
    1. Sufian S, Mentch L, Godfrey EM. Women with CF are helping guide reproductive and sexual health research. CF Roundtable. 2017:40.
    1. Godfrey EM, Kazmerski TM, Brown G, Thayer EK, Mentch L, Pam M, et al. Educational needs and preferences for patient-centered outcomes research in the cystic fibrosis community: mixed methods study. JMIR Form Res. 2021;5(3):e24302. doi: 10.2196/24302.
    1. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, Seers K, Mockford C, Goodlad S, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. Research Involv Engagem. 2017;3(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0062-2.
    1. Langley GJ. The improvement guide: a practical approach to enhancing organizational performance, 2nd ed. In: Langley GJ, editor. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2009.
    1. Long-Genovese S. A guide to best practices in training development. In: Institute of Translational Health Sciences, editor. Seattle, WA: University of Washington; 2017.
    1. Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Complete. New York: Longman; 2001.
    1. Ambrose SA, Bridges MW, DiPietro M, Lovett MC, Norman MK, Mayer RE. How learning works: seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Hoboken: Wiley; 2010.
    1. Silberman ML, Biech E, Auerbach C. Active training: a handbook of techniques, designs, case examples, and tips. New York: Wiley; 2015.
    1. Adams A, Williamson A, Sorkness C, Hatfield P, Eggen A, Esmond S. The steps model: a practical tool for engaging communities to improve health outcomes. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2017;92(6):890. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001677.
    1. Anyanwu CU, Hemphill R. PCORI engagement blogs. Washington, DC: PCORI. 2017. .
    1. Bennett LM, Gadlin H. Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice. J Investig Med. 2012;60(5):768–775. doi: 10.2310/JIM.0b013e318250871d.
    1. Forsythe L, Heckert A, Margolis MK, Schrandt S, Frank L. Methods and impact of engagement in research, from theory to practice and back again: early findings from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(1):17–31. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1581-x.
    1. Forsythe LP, Carman KL, Szydlowski V, Fayish L, Davidson L, Hickam DH, et al. Patient engagement in research: early findings from the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Health Aff (Millwood) 2019;38(3):359–367. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05067.
    1. Jones J, Barry MM. Developing a scale to measure trust in health promotion partnerships. Health Promot Int. 2011;26(4):484–491. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar007.
    1. Kazmerski TM, Miller E, Sawicki GS, Thomas P, Prushinskaya O, Nelson E, et al. Developing sexual and reproductive health educational resources for young women with cystic fibrosis: a structured approach to stakeholder engagement. Patient. 2019;12(2):267–276. doi: 10.1007/s40271-018-0342-4.
    1. Minneci PC, Nacion KM, Lodwick DL, Cooper JN, Deans KJ. Improving surgical research by involving stakeholders. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(6):579–580. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2015.4898.
    1. Sheridan S, Schrandt S, Forsythe L, Hilliard TS, Paez KA. The PCORI engagement rubric: promising practices for partnering in research. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15(2):165–170. doi: 10.1370/afm.2042.
    1. Thayer EK, Pam M, Al Achkar M, Mentch L, Brown G, Kazmerski TM, et al. Best practices for virtual engagement of patient-centered outcomes research teams during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative study. J Particip Med. 2021;13(1):e24966. doi: 10.2196/24966.
    1. Godfrey EM, Mentch L. Bringing patient centered outcomes research to the CF community. : Cystic Fibrosis Research Institute; 2020. Podcast: 34:58
    1. Roberson PK, Shema SJ, Mundfrom DJ, Holmes TM. Analysis of paired Likert data: how to evaluate change and preference questions. Fam Med. 1995;27:671–675.
    1. R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2020.
    1. Mentch L. Patient-centered outcomes research: a new approach for the CF community. CF Roundtable: a newsletter for adults who have cystic fibrosis. 2020 Summer, 2020:56.
    1. Fregonese F. Community involvement in biomedical research conducted in the global health context; what can be done to make it really matter? BMC Med Ethics. 2018;19(Suppl 1):44. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0283-4.
    1. Lavallee DC, Gore JL, Lawrence SO, Lindsay J, Marsh S, Scott MR, et al. Initiative to support patient involvement in research (INSPIRE): community workshop report. 2016 October 2016.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться