首页> 外文期刊>Research Involvement and Engagement >Patient and public involvement in Paediatric Intensive Care research: considerations, challenges and facilitating factors
【24h】

Patient and public involvement in Paediatric Intensive Care research: considerations, challenges and facilitating factors

机译:患者和公众参与小儿重症监护研究:注意事项,挑战和促进因素

获取原文
           

摘要

Plain English summaryPlain English summaryPaediatric Intensive Care (PIC) provides care to extremely ill children. Research in this area can be difficult because children are often too sick to discuss being involved in a study and parents are too upset about their child to think about taking part. This makes it even more important that research is well designed. We conducted a review of the literature about involving patients and the public (PPI) in PIC research. We wanted to know what PPI has taken place, who had been consulted and how this was undertaken. We reviewed the titles and abstracts of 4717 papers but found only 4 relevant papers. Three of the papers had consulted with parents of children who had been on PIC but only one study had spoken directly to a child themselves. The studies had used a number of different methods to invite people to take part but there did not appear to be one solution. All of the studies thought PPI was good for the development of their research but none of them had tried to measure what had changed as a result. There are difficulties associated with carrying out PPI in the PIC setting. Researchers need to share more of their experiences, positive and negative, so we can try to identify the best ways of carrying out PPI in PIC studies. This will help ensure that research studies are designed which address the needs and concerns of children and their parents. Introduction Involving the public in health care research is reported to enhance the quality, appropriateness, acceptability and relevance to patients and the public (INVOLVE, Briefing notes for researchers, 2012; Staniszewska et al., Int J Technol Assess Health Care 274:391-9, 2011). Conducting research with children and young people is regarded as challenging and this makes it even more important that the research is well designed and understands the perspective of the child and family. We conducted a narrative literature review of the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) literature, in the context of Paediatric Intensive Care (PIC). Our aims were to identify what PPI activity has taken place, with whom researchers engaged and what outcomes they reported. Method Electronic databases Medline, CINAHL and Embase (January 2000- June 2016) were searched using the search terms patient and public involvement and consultation. Participants were defined as child, parent, paediatric or pediatric and the context as intensive or critical care. Papers were excluded where activity reflected ‘participants’ as research subjects. Included papers were reviewed using the GRIPP checklist to appraise the quality of reporting. Results The search strategy identified 4717 abstracts. Seventeen papers were reviewed in full and four papers were included, all of which are case studies, describing a consultation approach. None of the papers described PPI as a multi-stage process. Only one study engaged with a former PIC patient and the majority of those consulted did not have any PIC experience. Activity was reported as being of benefit but there was no measurement of the impact of PPI. Conclusion There are numerous challenges associated with the conduct of research in PIC. It is therefore essential that the perspective of children, young people and their parents have been considered in the design of trials. However, there are few published accounts of PPI within the PIC context and the accounts that exist highlight issues about who to approach and when, and a lack of clarity about the best ways to engage with them. Research Ethics Committees and funding bodies expect to see evidence of PPI in research applications and we need to develop our understanding of what contributes towards successful PPI in this context.
机译:普通英语摘要普通英语摘要儿科重症监护(PIC)为重症儿童提供护理。在这方面进行研究可能很困难,因为孩子经常生病以至于无法讨论参加一项研究,而父母对孩子太不高兴而无法考虑参加。因此,精心设计研究显得尤为重要。我们对有关患者和公众参与PIC研究的文献进行了回顾。我们想知道发生了什么PPI,请教过谁以及如何进行。我们审查了4717篇论文的标题和摘要,但仅找到4篇相关论文。其中三篇论文曾与曾参加过PIC的孩子的父母进行过协商,但只有一项研究直接与孩子自己对话。研究使用了多种不同的方法来邀请人们参加,但似乎没有一种解决方案。所有的研究都认为PPI对他们的研究发展是有好处的,但是没有一个人试图衡量结果的变化。在PIC设置中执行PPI会有一些困难。研究人员需要分享更多的正面和负面经验,因此我们可以尝试确定在PIC研究中进行PPI的最佳方法。这将有助于确保设计的研究能够解决儿童及其父母的需求和关注。引言据报道,公众参与医疗保健研究可以提高患者和公众的质量,适当性,可接受性和相关性(INVOLVE,研究人员简报,2012; Staniszewska等人,Int J Technol Assess Health Care 274:391- 2011年9月9日)。与儿童和年轻人进行研究被认为具有挑战性,这使得进行精心设计并理解儿童和家庭的观点变得尤为重要。在儿童重症监护(PIC)的背景下,我们对患者和公众参与(PPI)文献进行了叙述性文献综述。我们的目标是确定发生了什么PPI活动,与哪些研究人员合作以及他们报告了什么结果。方法使用患者和公众参与及咨询这两个搜索词来搜索Medline,CINAHL和Embase(2000年1月至2016年6月)的电子数据库。参加者定义为儿童,父母,小儿或小儿,背景为重症监护或重症监护。如果活动反映“参与者”为研究对象,则排除论文。使用GRIPP清单对纳入的论文进行了评估,以评估报告的质量。结果搜索策略共检索到4717个摘要。全文审查了17篇论文,其中包括四篇论文,所有这些都是案例研究,描述了一种咨询方法。没有一篇论文将PPI描述为一个多阶段过程。只有一项与前PIC患者有关的研究,而接受咨询的大多数患者没有任何PIC经验。据报活动是有益的,但没有衡量PPI影响的方法。结论在PIC中进行研究存在许多挑战。因此,在审判的设计中必须考虑儿童,年轻人及其父母的观点。但是,在事先知情同意的背景下,很少有已公布的PPI账目,并且已有的账目突出显示了与谁接触和何时接触的问题,以及与他们接触的最佳方法缺乏明确性。研究伦理委员会和资助机构希望在研究应用中看到PPI的证据,我们需要在这种情况下加深对成功PPI的贡献的理解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号