A framework for implementing Patient and Public Involvement in mental health research: The PATHWAY research programme benchmarked against NIHR standards

被引:4
作者
Capobianco, Lora [1 ,7 ]
Faija, Cintia [2 ]
Cooper, Bethany [1 ]
Brown, Lindsey [3 ]
McPhillips, Rebecca [4 ]
Shields, Gemma [5 ]
Wells, Adrian [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Greater Manchester Mental Hlth NHS Fdn Trust, Manchester Acad Hlth Sci Ctr, Res & Innovat, Manchester, England
[2] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Sch Hlth Sci, Div Nursing Midwifery & Social Work, Manchester, England
[3] Publ Contributor, Manchester, England
[4] Univ Manchester, Sch Hlth Sci, Div Populat Hlth, Fac Biol Med & Hlth,Hlth Serv Res & Primary Care, Manchester, England
[5] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester Ctr Hlth Econ, Sch Hlth Sci,Div Populat Hlth,Hlth Serv Res & Prim, Manchester, England
[6] Univ Manchester, Sch Hlth Sci, Ctr Newtreatment & Understanding Mental Hlth CeNTr, Div Psychol & Mental Hlth,Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester, England
[7] Greater Manchester Mental Hlth NHS Fdn Trust, Manchester Acad Hlth Sci Ctr, Res & Innovat, Manchester, England
关键词
anxiety; cardiac rehabilitation; depression; metacognitive therapy; Patient and Public Involvement; PPI; psychological therapies; IMPACT; CARE;
D O I
10.1111/hex.13676
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundPatient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research has become a key component recommended by research commissioners, grant award bodies and specified in government policies. Despite the increased call for PPI, few studies have demonstrated how to implement PPI within large-scale research studies. ObjectiveThe aim of the current study was to provide a case example of the implementation of a patient advisory group in a large-scale mental health research programme (PATHWAY) and to benchmark this against UK standards. MethodA PPI group was incorporated throughout the PATHWAY research programme, from grant development to dissemination. The group attended regular meetings and supported participant recruitment, evaluated patient-facing documents, supported the piloting of the research intervention and co-developed the dissemination and impact strategy. The implementation of PPI throughout the project was benchmarked against the UK standards for PPI. ResultsThe inclusion of PPI in the PATHWAY project provided tangible changes to the research project (i.e., improving study documents, co-developing dissemination materials) but also proved to be a beneficial experience to PPI members through the development of new skills and the opportunity to provide a patient voice in research. We show how PPI was involved across seven study phases and provide examples of implementation of the six UK standards. The study did not include PPI in data analysis but met all the UK standards for PPI. Challenges regarding practical components (i.e., meeting frequency, language use), increasing diversity and PPI members' knowledge of research were highlighted as areas for further improvement. ConclusionsWe provide a case example of how PPI can be implemented throughout a research lifecycle and we note the barriers faced and make suggestions for PPI in future implementation and research. Patient and Public ContributionPPI members were involved throughout the lifecycle of the research programme. The PPI lead was a co-author on the manuscript and contributed to report writing.
引用
收藏
页码:640 / 650
页数:11
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2012, BRIEFING NOTES RES P
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2021, Briefing notes for researchers-public involvement in NHS, health and social care research
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care
[4]  
Bee, 2018, RES HDB PATIENT PUBL, DOI [10.7765/9781526136527, DOI 10.7765/9781526136527]
[5]   "About sixty per cent I want to do it": Health researchers' attitudes to, and experiences of, patient and public involvement (PPI)-A qualitative interview study [J].
Boylan, Anne-Marie ;
Locock, Louise ;
Thomson, Richard ;
Staniszewska, Sophie .
HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2019, 22 (04) :721-730
[6]   A Systematic Review of the Impact of Patient and Public Involvement on Service Users, Researchers and Communities [J].
Brett, Jo ;
Staniszewska, Sophie ;
Mockford, Carole ;
Herron-Marx, Sandra ;
Hughes, John ;
Tysall, Colin ;
Suleman, Rashida .
PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2014, 7 (04) :387-395
[7]   Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review [J].
Brett, Jo ;
Staniszewska, Sophie ;
Mockford, Carole ;
Herron-Marx, Sandra ;
Hughes, John ;
Tysall, Colin ;
Suleman, Rashida .
HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2014, 17 (05) :637-650
[8]   Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care [J].
Crawford, MJ ;
Rutter, D ;
Manley, C ;
Weaver, T ;
Bhui, K ;
Fulop, N ;
Tyrer, P .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7375) :1263-1265
[9]   Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Crocker, Joanna C. ;
Ricci-Cabello, Ignacio ;
Parker, Adwoa ;
Hirst, Jennifer A. ;
Chant, Alan ;
Petit-Zeman, Sophie ;
Evans, David ;
Rees, Sian .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2018, 363
[10]  
Fisher P., 2009, Metacognitive therapy: The cbt distinctive features series