Patient and public involvement (PPI) in UK surgical trials: a survey and focus groups with stakeholders to identify practices, views, and experiences.


Journal

Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Feb 2019
Historique:
received: 30 08 2018
accepted: 07 01 2019
entrez: 13 2 2019
pubmed: 13 2 2019
medline: 14 6 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Historically, patient and public involvement (PPI) in the design and conduct of surgical trials has been absent or minimal, but it is now routinely recommended and even required by some research funders. We aimed to identify and describe current PPI practice in surgical trials in the United Kingdom, and to explore the views and experiences of surgical trial staff and patient or public contributors in relation to these practices. This was part of a larger study to inform development of a robust PPI intervention aimed at improving recruitment and retention in surgical trials. Our study had two stages: 1) an online survey to identify current PPI practice in active UK-led, adult surgical trials; and 2) focus groups and interviews with key stakeholders (surgical trial investigators, administrators, and patient or public contributors) to explore their views and experiences of PPI. Of 129 eligible surgical trial teams identified, 71 (55%) took part in the survey. In addition, 54 stakeholders subsequently took part in focus groups or interviews. Sixty-five (92%) survey respondents reported some kind of PPI, most commonly at the design and dissemination stages and in oversight or advisory roles. The single most common PPI activity was developing participant information sheets (72%). Participants reported mixed practice and views on a variety of issues including the involvement of patients versus lay members of the public, recruitment methods, use of role descriptions and payment for the time of PPI contributors. They suggested some solutions, including the use of written role descriptions and databases of potential PPI contributors to aid recruitment. UK surgical trials involve patients and members of the public in a variety of different ways, most commonly at the beginning and end of the trial lifecycle and in oversight or advisory roles. These are not without challenges and there remain uncertainties about who best to involve, why, and how. Future research should aim to address these issues.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OBJECTIVE
Historically, patient and public involvement (PPI) in the design and conduct of surgical trials has been absent or minimal, but it is now routinely recommended and even required by some research funders. We aimed to identify and describe current PPI practice in surgical trials in the United Kingdom, and to explore the views and experiences of surgical trial staff and patient or public contributors in relation to these practices. This was part of a larger study to inform development of a robust PPI intervention aimed at improving recruitment and retention in surgical trials.
METHODS METHODS
Our study had two stages: 1) an online survey to identify current PPI practice in active UK-led, adult surgical trials; and 2) focus groups and interviews with key stakeholders (surgical trial investigators, administrators, and patient or public contributors) to explore their views and experiences of PPI.
RESULTS RESULTS
Of 129 eligible surgical trial teams identified, 71 (55%) took part in the survey. In addition, 54 stakeholders subsequently took part in focus groups or interviews. Sixty-five (92%) survey respondents reported some kind of PPI, most commonly at the design and dissemination stages and in oversight or advisory roles. The single most common PPI activity was developing participant information sheets (72%). Participants reported mixed practice and views on a variety of issues including the involvement of patients versus lay members of the public, recruitment methods, use of role descriptions and payment for the time of PPI contributors. They suggested some solutions, including the use of written role descriptions and databases of potential PPI contributors to aid recruitment.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
UK surgical trials involve patients and members of the public in a variety of different ways, most commonly at the beginning and end of the trial lifecycle and in oversight or advisory roles. These are not without challenges and there remain uncertainties about who best to involve, why, and how. Future research should aim to address these issues.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30744684
doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3183-0
pii: 10.1186/s13063-019-3183-0
pmc: PMC6371592
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

119

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L004933/2
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC)
ID : NIHR-BRC-1215-20008
Organisme : Medical Research Council (MRC) Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research
ID : MR/L004933/1-N66
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L004933/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU2
Pays : United Kingdom

Références

BMC Med. 2011 Jul 21;9:89
pubmed: 21777435
Trials. 2012 Jan 13;13:9
pubmed: 22243649
BMJ Open. 2014 Jun 17;4(6):e004943
pubmed: 24939808
Ann Surg. 2015 Feb;261(2):243-50
pubmed: 24950279
BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 23;4(7):e005234
pubmed: 25056972
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2015 Jan;20(1):45-51
pubmed: 25228453
BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 04;4(12):e006400
pubmed: 25475243
Trials. 2015 Apr 27;16:190
pubmed: 25928689
Health Expect. 2017 Jun;20(3):519-528
pubmed: 27338242
Health Expect. 2017 Oct;20(5):836-844
pubmed: 27885770
Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1401-1410
pubmed: 28618076
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Apr 27;2:15
pubmed: 29062516
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Aug 2;3:13
pubmed: 29062538
J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Feb;24(1):240-253
pubmed: 29076631
Trials. 2018 Feb 7;19(1):95
pubmed: 29415751
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 May 24;4:16
pubmed: 29850029
BMJ. 2018 Nov 28;363:k4738
pubmed: 30487232

Auteurs

Joanna C Crocker (JC)

Health Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. joanna.crocker@phc.ox.ac.uk.
NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK. joanna.crocker@phc.ox.ac.uk.
MRC ConDuCT-II (Collaboration and innovation for Difficult and Complex randomised controlled Trials In Invasive procedures) Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK. joanna.crocker@phc.ox.ac.uk.

Keira Pratt-Boyden (K)

School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Formerly Health Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Jenny Hislop (J)

Health Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Sian Rees (S)

Oxford Academic Health Science Network, Oxford, UK.

Louise Locock (L)

Formerly Health Experiences Research Group, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Sophie Olszowski (S)

Formerly NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and Unit, Oxford, UK.

Alan Chant (A)

Patient Partner, Berkshire, UK.

Shaun Treweek (S)

Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Jonathan A Cook (JA)

MRC ConDuCT-II (Collaboration and innovation for Difficult and Complex randomised controlled Trials In Invasive procedures) Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK.
Surgical Intervention Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Kerry Woolfall (K)

Institute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Liverpool, UK.

Nicola Farrar (N)

Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Formerly Surgical Intervention Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Jennifer Bostock (J)

Lay partner, Kent, UK.

Richard Bulbulia (R)

MRC CTSU (Clinical Trial Service Unit) Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
MRC Population Health Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cheltenham General Hospital, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cheltenham, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH