Public and patient involvement (PPI) in the design, execution and dissemination of a trial: the BISTRO trial.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
David Coyle, Paula Ormandy, Nancy Fernandes da Silva, Simon Davies
{"title":"Public and patient involvement (PPI) in the design, execution and dissemination of a trial: the BISTRO trial.","authors":"David Coyle, Paula Ormandy, Nancy Fernandes da Silva, Simon Davies","doi":"10.3310/DOTR5903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For people receiving haemodialysis, a balance has to be struck between removing sufficient but not too much fluid during a treatment session and maintaining any remaining kidney function they might have. In the BISTRO trial, this study sought to establish if getting the balance right might be improved by the additional use of bioimpedance, a device that measures body fluid composition to help decide how much fluid to remove during dialysis. Designing and executing this trial, which incorporated complex and repeated trial procedures that would be dependent on participant engagement, presented challenges that demanded effective public and patient involvement.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to develop an effective public and patient involvement participation model, ensuring that the patient voice was heard by the Trial Management Group, with a Patient Advisory Group undertaking coproduction of all participant-facing documents and communications, including dissemination of the trial results, with the main purpose of maximising participant engagement in the study.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An open-label randomised controlled trial in which 439 participants from 34 centres were allocated for regular assessments of their bodily fluid content with or without the use of bioimpedance measurements.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Development of an effective public and patient involvement working model that was represented within the Trial Management Group, contributing to protocol design, selection of bioimpedance device, and coproduction of all participant-facing communications including dissemination of trial findings.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Public and patient involvement contribution prior to trial initiation, description of the participant-facing communications, adherence to trial materials, dropout and dissemination of trial findings. Post-trial evaluation by research teams, Patient Advisory Group and co-applicants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An effective working model was developed which relied on remuneration of the public and patient involvement patient lead and use of social media (e.g. WhatsApp) to maximise inclusivity. The Patient Advisory Group coproduced with the Trial Management Group a series of communication postcards and newsletters and a web page to support the participants and disseminate the trial results that were highly rated by research teams, but not always passed on to trial participants. Participant adherence to the main trial outcomes was excellent (113.6% urine collections obtained). Potentially avoidable dropout was 14.4%, with 3.6% being clearly attributable to inability or unwillingness to comply with the trial procedures. Reflections by the Patient Advisory Group indicated that they felt valued, involved and listened to but anticipated more direct involvement with the trial participants, recommending that barriers to this be addressed during the trial design and set-up.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Evaluation of public and patient involvement was retrospective and there was a lack of real-time assessment of the impact of public and patient involvement that might have supported a causative link between public and patient involvement interventions and the successful delivery of the trial.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Public and patient involvement played an important role in the design, delivery and dissemination of the BISTRO trial. Key to this success was the close relationship between the Patient Advisory Group and the Trial Management Group. Given the complexity of the intervention, dropout was reasonably low and did not compromise trial findings, but reasons were not always clear. Prospective gathering of data to capture the impact of public and patient involvement is recommended and direct support for participants facilitated.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 14/216/01.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11808441/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/DOTR5903","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For people receiving haemodialysis, a balance has to be struck between removing sufficient but not too much fluid during a treatment session and maintaining any remaining kidney function they might have. In the BISTRO trial, this study sought to establish if getting the balance right might be improved by the additional use of bioimpedance, a device that measures body fluid composition to help decide how much fluid to remove during dialysis. Designing and executing this trial, which incorporated complex and repeated trial procedures that would be dependent on participant engagement, presented challenges that demanded effective public and patient involvement.

Objectives: This study aimed to develop an effective public and patient involvement participation model, ensuring that the patient voice was heard by the Trial Management Group, with a Patient Advisory Group undertaking coproduction of all participant-facing documents and communications, including dissemination of the trial results, with the main purpose of maximising participant engagement in the study.

Design: An open-label randomised controlled trial in which 439 participants from 34 centres were allocated for regular assessments of their bodily fluid content with or without the use of bioimpedance measurements.

Interventions: Development of an effective public and patient involvement working model that was represented within the Trial Management Group, contributing to protocol design, selection of bioimpedance device, and coproduction of all participant-facing communications including dissemination of trial findings.

Main outcome measures: Public and patient involvement contribution prior to trial initiation, description of the participant-facing communications, adherence to trial materials, dropout and dissemination of trial findings. Post-trial evaluation by research teams, Patient Advisory Group and co-applicants.

Results: An effective working model was developed which relied on remuneration of the public and patient involvement patient lead and use of social media (e.g. WhatsApp) to maximise inclusivity. The Patient Advisory Group coproduced with the Trial Management Group a series of communication postcards and newsletters and a web page to support the participants and disseminate the trial results that were highly rated by research teams, but not always passed on to trial participants. Participant adherence to the main trial outcomes was excellent (113.6% urine collections obtained). Potentially avoidable dropout was 14.4%, with 3.6% being clearly attributable to inability or unwillingness to comply with the trial procedures. Reflections by the Patient Advisory Group indicated that they felt valued, involved and listened to but anticipated more direct involvement with the trial participants, recommending that barriers to this be addressed during the trial design and set-up.

Limitations: Evaluation of public and patient involvement was retrospective and there was a lack of real-time assessment of the impact of public and patient involvement that might have supported a causative link between public and patient involvement interventions and the successful delivery of the trial.

Conclusions: Public and patient involvement played an important role in the design, delivery and dissemination of the BISTRO trial. Key to this success was the close relationship between the Patient Advisory Group and the Trial Management Group. Given the complexity of the intervention, dropout was reasonably low and did not compromise trial findings, but reasons were not always clear. Prospective gathering of data to capture the impact of public and patient involvement is recommended and direct support for participants facilitated.

Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 14/216/01.

公众和患者参与设计、执行和传播一项试验:BISTRO试验。
背景:对于接受血液透析的患者,必须在治疗过程中清除足够但不过多的液体和维持他们可能拥有的任何剩余肾功能之间取得平衡。在BISTRO试验中,这项研究试图确定是否可以通过额外使用生物阻抗来改善平衡,生物阻抗是一种测量体液成分的设备,可以帮助决定在透析过程中需要排出多少液体。设计和执行这项试验,包括复杂和重复的试验程序,将依赖于参与者的参与,提出了挑战,需要有效的公众和患者参与。目的:本研究旨在开发一种有效的公众和患者参与模式,确保患者的声音被试验管理小组听到,患者咨询小组负责共同制作所有面向参与者的文件和沟通,包括传播试验结果,主要目的是最大化参与者参与研究。设计:一项开放标签随机对照试验,其中来自34个中心的439名参与者被分配使用或不使用生物阻抗测量来定期评估其体液含量。干预措施:在试验管理小组中建立有效的公众和患者参与工作模式,有助于方案设计,生物阻抗装置的选择,以及所有面向参与者的沟通的合作,包括试验结果的传播。主要结局指标:试验开始前公众和患者参与的贡献,对参与者沟通的描述,对试验材料的依从性,退出和试验结果的传播。由研究小组、患者咨询小组和共同申请者进行试验后评价。结果:开发了一种有效的工作模式,该模式依赖于公众的报酬和患者的参与,患者的领导和使用社交媒体(如WhatsApp)来最大限度地提高包容性。患者咨询小组与试验管理小组共同制作了一系列通信明信片和通讯以及一个网页,以支持参与者并传播研究小组高度评价的试验结果,但并不总是传递给试验参与者。参与者对主要试验结果的依从性非常好(获得了113.6%的尿液收集)。潜在可避免的辍学率为14.4%,其中3.6%明显可归因于无法或不愿遵守试验程序。患者咨询小组的反映表明,他们感到受到重视,参与和倾听,但期望与试验参与者更直接的参与,建议在试验设计和设置期间解决这方面的障碍。局限性:公众和患者参与的评估是回顾性的,缺乏对公众和患者参与影响的实时评估,这可能支持公众和患者参与干预与试验成功交付之间的因果关系。结论:公众和患者的参与在BISTRO试验的设计、实施和传播中发挥了重要作用。这一成功的关键是患者咨询小组和试验管理小组之间的密切关系。考虑到干预的复杂性,退出率相对较低,并不影响试验结果,但原因并不总是很清楚。建议前瞻性地收集数据,以捕捉公众和患者参与的影响,并促进对参与者的直接支持。资助:本文介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目资助的独立研究,奖励号为14/216/01。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信