Involving Patients in Health Economics Research: "The PACTS Principles".


Journal

The patient
ISSN: 1178-1661
Titre abrégé: Patient
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101309314

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2021
Historique:
accepted: 19 09 2020
pubmed: 13 10 2020
medline: 8 1 2022
entrez: 12 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Discussion of public and patient involvement (PPI) in health economics (HE) research is growing. There is much literature on PPI principles and standards, but little specifically regarding involving patients in HE research. Here, we outline "PACTS", a set of principles, developed with a PPI group, for considering patient involvement in HE research. Planning: Involvement is best built in to research plans from the outset. This includes setting specific goals for involvement activities, and clearly communicating the background and purpose of involvement. Approach selection: We describe two main approaches to involvement-discussion-based and task-based. Discussion-based approaches are useful for generating broad insights and revealing "unknown unknowns". Task-based approaches offer a more focused means of shedding light on "known unknowns". Continuous involvement: Involving patients throughout the research process and across a range of projects helps build expertise for patients and insight for HE researchers. Team building: Meaningful involvement creates a shared sense of ownership of the research and, over time, helps to develop a team ethos, enhancing the positive impacts of involvement. Sensitivity: HE research can be perceived as technical and impersonal. Addressing this requires sensitivity, clarity, and an honest and open approach. There is increased recognition that patient contributors are experts at providing a "lived experience" perspective, in the way that clinicians are experts at providing an overview of conditions and HEs are experts in the methodology of their discipline. We hope these "PACTS Principles" complement existing PPI approaches and provide a useful foundation for health economists considering patient involvement.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33043427
doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00461-4
pii: 10.1007/s40271-020-00461-4
pmc: PMC7548133
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

429-434

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom

Références

INVOLVE. National Institute for Health Research, London. 2020. https://www.invo.org.uk/find-out-more/what-is-public-involvement-in-research-2/ . Accessed 19 Feb 2020.
National Health and Medical Research Council. Statement on consumer and community involvement in health and medical research. Australia: Consumers Health Forum of Australia; 2016.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CIHR’s Framework for Citizen Engagement. Partnerships and Citizen Engagement Branch. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Institutes of Health Research; 2012.
Minister of Science and Innovation and Minister of Health. New Zealand Health Research Strategy: Public discussion document. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health; 2016.
National Institutes of Health. Public Involvement at National Institute of Mental Health. 2020. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/outreach/public-involvement/index.shtml . Accessed 19 Feb 2020.
Department of Health. NHS Constitution. London: HMSO; 2015.
INVOLVE. National Institute for Health Research. 2020. https://www.invo.org.uk/ . Accessed 19 Feb 2020.
van Voorn G, Vemer P, Hamerlijnck D, Ramos I, Teunissen G, Al M, et al. The Missing Stakeholder Group: why patients should be involved in health economic modelling. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016;14:129–33.
doi: 10.1007/s40258-015-0200-7
Goodwin E, Boddy K, Tatnell L, Hawton A. Involving members of the public in health economics research: insights from selecting health states for valuation to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16(2):187–94.
doi: 10.1007/s40258-017-0355-5
Kandiyali R, Hawton A, Cabral C, Mytton J, Shilling V, Morris C, et al. Working with patients and members of the public: informing health economics in Child Health Research. Pharmacoeconomics Open. 2019;3(2):133–41.
doi: 10.1007/s41669-018-0099-7
UK Public Involvement Standards Development Partnership group. UK standards for public involvement: Better public involvement for better health and social care research. 2019. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U-IJNJCfFepaAOruEhzz1TdLvAcHTt2Q/view . Accessed 12 Feb 2020.
O'Shea E, et al. Knowledge of public patient involvement among health economists in Ireland: a baseline audit. HRB Open Res. 2019;2:4. https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.12896.1 .
doi: 10.12688/hrbopenres.12896.1
Goodwin E, Green C, Spencer A. Estimating a preference-based index for an eight dimensional health state classification system derived from the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29). Value Health. 2015;18:1025–36.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.10.004
Pandya-Wood R, Barron DS, Elliott J. A framework for public involvement at the design stage of NHS health and social care research: time to develop ethically conscious standards. Res Involv Engagem. 2017;3:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-017-0058-y .
doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0058-y pubmed: 29062531 pmcid: 5611655
INVOLVE. Briefing note five: Be clear with the people you want to involve. Template two: role description. National Institute for Health Research, London. 2020. Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
NHS Health Research Authority. Public Involvement. 2020. https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/best-practice/public-involvement/ . Accessed 23 Jun 2020.
Dudley L, Gamble CG, Preston J, Buck D, The EPIC Patient Advisory Group, Hanley B, Williamson P, Young B. What difference does patient and public involvement make and what are its pathways to impact? Qualitative study of patients and researchers from a cohort of randomised clinical trials. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0128817. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128817
Pizzo E, Doyle C, Matthews R, Barlow J. Patient and public involvement: how much do we spend and what are the benefits? Health Expect. 2015;18(6):1918–26.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12204
Mullins CD, Abdulhalim AM, Lavallee DC. Continuous patient engagement in comparative effectiveness research. JAMA. 2012;307:1587–8.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.442
Wilson P, Mathie E, Keenan J, McNeilly E, Goodman C, Howe A, Poland F, Staniszeska S, Kendell S, Munday D, Cowe M, Peckham S. ReseArch with Patient and Public invOlvement: a RealisT evaluation – the RAPPORT study. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2015;3(38)
Gibson A, Welsman J, Britten N. Evaluating patient and public involvement in health research: from theoretical model to practical workshop. Health Expect. 2017;20(5):826–35.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12486
Crocker J, et al. Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK-based qualitative interview study. Health Expect. 2017;20(3):519–28.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12479

Auteurs

Annie Hawton (A)

Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK. a.hawton@exeter.ac.uk.
NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South West Peninsula, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK. a.hawton@exeter.ac.uk.

Kate Boddy (K)

NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South West Peninsula, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK.

Rebecca Kandiyali (R)

Health Economics at Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Lynn Tatnell (L)

Patient and Public Involvement Group (PenPIG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, UK.

Andy Gibson (A)

Department of Health and Social Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.

Elizabeth Goodwin (E)

Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, 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