The experience of patient partners in research: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.
Experience
Patient and public involvement
Patient engagement
Qualitative research
Systematic review
Journal
Research involvement and engagement
ISSN: 2056-7529
Titre abrégé: Res Involv Engagem
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101708164
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Oct 2022
03 Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
05
10
2021
accepted:
16
09
2022
entrez:
3
10
2022
pubmed:
4
10
2022
medline:
4
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patient engagement in research consists in involving patients as partners across the research cycle. This practice has quickly become an international standard, with funding bodies actively encouraging it. As the increased incentive to engage patients can lead to tokenistic partnerships, it is important to consider the experiences of patient-partners. To synthesize the qualitative literature on the experience of patients as partners in research. A systematic review of the literature with thematic synthesis was realized, guided by the framework developed by Thomas and Harden (Bmc Med Res Methodol 8: 45, 2008). A search strategy was developed to encompass keywords relating to patient-partners in research, their experience, and the qualitative nature of the target studies. 10 databases were searched using the EBSCO-host engine, along with the Scopus engine to include EMBASE. The search results were screened for the following inclusion criteria: articles written in English; articles reporting on the experience of patient-partners in research; qualitative studies or mixed-methods studies with a distinct qualitative section. Included articles were charted for general information. The CASP qualitative checklist was used for critical appraisal. The "results" section of each article was coded line by line. Codes were aggregated inductively to form descriptive themes and analytical themes, in order to synthesize the ideas found in the selection of articles. The initial search yielded 10,222 results. After the removal of duplicates, 5534 titles and abstracts were screened, 88 full-text reports were evaluated, and 41 studies were included. Articles reporting on these studies were published between 2005 and 2020. Seven themes emerged from the analysis: "motivations to engage in research", "activities in patient engagement", "structure", "competence", "team dynamics", "impacts on broader life", and "illness". Articles reported varying degrees of perceived impact on research and satisfaction concerning the level of engagement. The importance of power differentials and team dynamics were widely stated. Findings provide an in-depth view of the experiences of patient-partners in research. Most articles reported a generally positive experience, but challenges and pitfalls of patient engagement were identified. This will serve research teams by highlighting good practices and possible improvements. Patient engagement is the practice of involving patients as partners in research teams. Through these partnerships, patients become co-researchers, which promotes patient-centered research. In recent years, this practice has quickly gained popularity and is now encouraged by scientific funding bodies. This financial incentive to engage patients helps to promote the practice but can lead to tokenistic partnerships. Therefore, it is important to understand how patient-partners experience engagement in research.This systematic review aimed to describe the experience of patient-partners in research by synthesizing existing studies on the subject. 41 relevant studies were found, which described seven general themes in patient-partners’ experience. These themes were “motivations to engage in research”, “activities in patient engagement”, “structure”, “competence”, “team dynamics”, “impacts on broader life”, and “illness”. Within these themes, many positive experiences were described, such as the stimulating intellectual challenges of research, or the pride of helping others. Negative experiences were also identified, such as when patient-partners felt inadequately prepared for research activities, or when hierarchies of powers were formed. These findings will allow future research teams to improve patient engagement and will hopefully lead to better experiences for patient-partners.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Patient engagement is the practice of involving patients as partners in research teams. Through these partnerships, patients become co-researchers, which promotes patient-centered research. In recent years, this practice has quickly gained popularity and is now encouraged by scientific funding bodies. This financial incentive to engage patients helps to promote the practice but can lead to tokenistic partnerships. Therefore, it is important to understand how patient-partners experience engagement in research.This systematic review aimed to describe the experience of patient-partners in research by synthesizing existing studies on the subject. 41 relevant studies were found, which described seven general themes in patient-partners’ experience. These themes were “motivations to engage in research”, “activities in patient engagement”, “structure”, “competence”, “team dynamics”, “impacts on broader life”, and “illness”. Within these themes, many positive experiences were described, such as the stimulating intellectual challenges of research, or the pride of helping others. Negative experiences were also identified, such as when patient-partners felt inadequately prepared for research activities, or when hierarchies of powers were formed. These findings will allow future research teams to improve patient engagement and will hopefully lead to better experiences for patient-partners.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36192817
doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00388-0
pii: 10.1186/s40900-022-00388-0
pmc: PMC9528123
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
55Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2018 Jul;23(3):158-167
pubmed: 29504424
BMJ Qual Saf. 2022 Feb;31(2):134-146
pubmed: 34253682
Qual Health Res. 2012 Oct;22(10):1425-34
pubmed: 22865107
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 Jan 24;14(1):21
pubmed: 30678705
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2005 Spring;28(4):403-6
pubmed: 15895927
Health Expect. 2021 May;24 Suppl 1:30-39
pubmed: 31705620
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 Oct 29;4:36
pubmed: 30397509
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Mar 31;6:10
pubmed: 32266084
Health Expect. 2018 Feb;21(1):396-406
pubmed: 28984405
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 May 14;4:15
pubmed: 29785283
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2015 Dec;5(5):518-21
pubmed: 24727479
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89
pubmed: 24568690
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 17;8(8):e022154
pubmed: 30121606
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 27;12:181
pubmed: 23185978
Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Mar;38(3):359-367
pubmed: 30830822
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 May 12;2:18
pubmed: 29062519
J Intellect Disabil. 2021 Dec;25(4):567-582
pubmed: 32729369
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Nov 28;5:38
pubmed: 31798964
Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):328-336
pubmed: 31800154
J Ment Health. 2010 Jun;19(3):249-57
pubmed: 20441489
Health Expect. 2020 Jun;23(3):691-706
pubmed: 32181553
Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener. 2019 Nov;20(7-8):511-520
pubmed: 31373235
Patient. 2014;7(4):387-95
pubmed: 25034612
J Comp Eff Res. 2016 Aug;5(5):487-97
pubmed: 27427160
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Mar 16;7(1):15
pubmed: 33726817
Health Expect. 2021 May;24 Suppl 1:62-69
pubmed: 31868308
Nurs Res. 2020 Sep/Oct;69(5):367-375
pubmed: 32496396
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jul 10;8:45
pubmed: 18616818
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2013 Sep;20(7):641-9
pubmed: 23167824
Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(23):2174-83
pubmed: 25598139
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Mar;176:85-92
pubmed: 28135693
BMJ. 1998 Feb 7;316(7129):463-6
pubmed: 9492683
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Jan 20;19(1):8
pubmed: 33472647
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 Dec 01;4:43
pubmed: 30519486
BMJ. 2018 Nov 28;363:k4738
pubmed: 30487232
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50
pubmed: 22809132
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):643-649
pubmed: 31355516
Qual Health Res. 2014 Jan;24(1):46-54
pubmed: 24277776
Qual Health Res. 2020 Dec;30(14):2265-2277
pubmed: 33012242
J Ment Health. 2016;25(1):28-35
pubmed: 26733079
J Intellect Disabil. 2019 Mar;23(1):78-96
pubmed: 28812949
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2010 Apr;16(4):160-2
pubmed: 20559177
BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 04;4(12):e006400
pubmed: 25475243
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Jun 19;6:33
pubmed: 32579132
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):496-503
pubmed: 30779324
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Nov 1;6(1):65
pubmed: 33292731
Res Involv Engagem. 2015 Aug 7;1:8
pubmed: 29062497
Health Expect. 2018 Feb;21(1):100-109
pubmed: 28640480
Health Info Libr J. 2017 Jun;34(2):125-133
pubmed: 28042699