利用社区共识方法促进脊髓损伤网络共同决策的案例研究

Emily E. Giroux, Peter Athanasopoulos, Shane N. Sweet, Heather L Gainforth
{"title":"利用社区共识方法促进脊髓损伤网络共同决策的案例研究","authors":"Emily E. Giroux, Peter Athanasopoulos, Shane N. Sweet, Heather L Gainforth","doi":"10.3389/fresc.2024.1335467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Spinal cord injury (SCI) research and policy decisions are rarely made in partnership with people with SCI, making them less relevant, applicable, and used by those whom the decisions are intended to support. Across disciplines, consensus methods have been promoted as a viable solution for supporting shared research and policy-based decision-making. In this paper, we describe a partnered approach between academic researchers and the Ontario SCI Alliance, a non-profit, SCI community mobilization network to co-develop and co-disseminate a community-based consensus exercise. The community-based consensus exercise included two modified Delphi surveys and one in-person retreat. The partnership's goal with this exercise was to facilitate shared decision-making for the development of their upcoming strategic plan. We then interviewed partners and participants from the Delphi and in-person retreat to discuss successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise. Survey 1 was disseminated to over 2,500 members of the Ontario SCI community and received 374 responses (276 coming from people with SCI). Survey 2 had 118 responses, with 87 coming from people with SCI. The retreat had 73 attendees, including people with SCI, family/friends of people with SCI, clinicians, researchers, and SCI community and research organization staff/volunteers. The retreat included a presentation of the survey results, a clinician/researcher panel, and externally-facilitated working groups. All survey responses and retreat materials were synthesized. Using the synthesized feedback, the Ontario SCI Alliance was able to implement several changes for the Ontario SCI community, including higher-quality primary care experiences (reduced wait times, more accessible examining rooms), the development of a wound care strategy with the Ontario government, and an advocacy campaign for public coverage for catheters and urinary care supplies. From the five interviews conducted, five themes were co-constructed regarding the successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise: (1) Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility; (2) Partnership; (3) Design Considerations; (4) Transparency and Clarity in Communication; and (5) Sustainability. Findings from this community case study demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a community-level consensus exercise among an equity-deserving group while providing detailed guidance for how to ensure future research and policy-based decision-making is shared across diverse knowledge users.","PeriodicalId":507590,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A case study of using community-based consensus methods to facilitate shared decision-making among a spinal cord injury network\",\"authors\":\"Emily E. Giroux, Peter Athanasopoulos, Shane N. Sweet, Heather L Gainforth\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fresc.2024.1335467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Spinal cord injury (SCI) research and policy decisions are rarely made in partnership with people with SCI, making them less relevant, applicable, and used by those whom the decisions are intended to support. Across disciplines, consensus methods have been promoted as a viable solution for supporting shared research and policy-based decision-making. In this paper, we describe a partnered approach between academic researchers and the Ontario SCI Alliance, a non-profit, SCI community mobilization network to co-develop and co-disseminate a community-based consensus exercise. The community-based consensus exercise included two modified Delphi surveys and one in-person retreat. The partnership's goal with this exercise was to facilitate shared decision-making for the development of their upcoming strategic plan. We then interviewed partners and participants from the Delphi and in-person retreat to discuss successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise. Survey 1 was disseminated to over 2,500 members of the Ontario SCI community and received 374 responses (276 coming from people with SCI). Survey 2 had 118 responses, with 87 coming from people with SCI. The retreat had 73 attendees, including people with SCI, family/friends of people with SCI, clinicians, researchers, and SCI community and research organization staff/volunteers. The retreat included a presentation of the survey results, a clinician/researcher panel, and externally-facilitated working groups. All survey responses and retreat materials were synthesized. Using the synthesized feedback, the Ontario SCI Alliance was able to implement several changes for the Ontario SCI community, including higher-quality primary care experiences (reduced wait times, more accessible examining rooms), the development of a wound care strategy with the Ontario government, and an advocacy campaign for public coverage for catheters and urinary care supplies. From the five interviews conducted, five themes were co-constructed regarding the successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise: (1) Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility; (2) Partnership; (3) Design Considerations; (4) Transparency and Clarity in Communication; and (5) Sustainability. Findings from this community case study demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a community-level consensus exercise among an equity-deserving group while providing detailed guidance for how to ensure future research and policy-based decision-making is shared across diverse knowledge users.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507590,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1335467\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1335467","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脊髓损伤(SCI)的研究和政策决策很少是与脊髓损伤患者共同制定的,这就降低了决策的相关性、适用性,也不利于决策所要支持的人群使用。在各个学科中,共识方法被认为是支持共同研究和政策决策的可行方案。在本文中,我们介绍了学术研究人员与安大略 SCI 联盟(一个非营利性 SCI 社区动员网络)合作,共同开发和传播基于社区的共识练习的方法。基于社区的共识活动包括两次修改后的德尔菲调查和一次面对面的务虚会。该合作伙伴关系开展此次活动的目的是促进共同决策,以制定其即将出台的战略计划。随后,我们采访了合作伙伴以及德尔菲和面对面务虚会的参与者,讨论了此次活动的成功、挑战和经验教训。调查 1 分发给了安大略省 SCI 社区的 2,500 多名成员,收到了 374 份回复(其中 276 份来自 SCI 患者)。调查 2 收到 118 份回复,其中 87 份来自 SCI 患者。有 73 人参加了务虚会,其中包括 SCI 患者、SCI 患者的家人/朋友、临床医生、研究人员以及 SCI 社区和研究机构的工作人员/志愿者。务虚会包括调查结果展示、临床医生/研究人员小组讨论和外部协助的工作组。所有的调查反馈和务虚会材料都进行了综合。利用综合反馈,安大略 SCI 联盟为安大略 SCI 社区实施了多项改革,包括提供更高质量的初级保健体验(减少等待时间、提供更方便的检查室)、与安大略政府共同制定伤口护理战略,以及开展宣传活动,为导尿管和泌尿系统护理用品提供公共保险。通过五次访谈,我们共同构建了五个主题,分别涉及成功、挑战以及从活动中吸取的经验教训:(1)包容性、多样性、公平性和无障碍性;(2)合作伙伴关系;(3)设计考虑因素;(4)沟通的透明度和清晰度;以及(5)可持续性。该社区案例研究的结果表明,在需要公平的群体中开展社区层面的共识活动是可行的,同时也为如何确保不同知识用户共享未来的研究和基于政策的决策提供了详细指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A case study of using community-based consensus methods to facilitate shared decision-making among a spinal cord injury network
Spinal cord injury (SCI) research and policy decisions are rarely made in partnership with people with SCI, making them less relevant, applicable, and used by those whom the decisions are intended to support. Across disciplines, consensus methods have been promoted as a viable solution for supporting shared research and policy-based decision-making. In this paper, we describe a partnered approach between academic researchers and the Ontario SCI Alliance, a non-profit, SCI community mobilization network to co-develop and co-disseminate a community-based consensus exercise. The community-based consensus exercise included two modified Delphi surveys and one in-person retreat. The partnership's goal with this exercise was to facilitate shared decision-making for the development of their upcoming strategic plan. We then interviewed partners and participants from the Delphi and in-person retreat to discuss successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise. Survey 1 was disseminated to over 2,500 members of the Ontario SCI community and received 374 responses (276 coming from people with SCI). Survey 2 had 118 responses, with 87 coming from people with SCI. The retreat had 73 attendees, including people with SCI, family/friends of people with SCI, clinicians, researchers, and SCI community and research organization staff/volunteers. The retreat included a presentation of the survey results, a clinician/researcher panel, and externally-facilitated working groups. All survey responses and retreat materials were synthesized. Using the synthesized feedback, the Ontario SCI Alliance was able to implement several changes for the Ontario SCI community, including higher-quality primary care experiences (reduced wait times, more accessible examining rooms), the development of a wound care strategy with the Ontario government, and an advocacy campaign for public coverage for catheters and urinary care supplies. From the five interviews conducted, five themes were co-constructed regarding the successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the exercise: (1) Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility; (2) Partnership; (3) Design Considerations; (4) Transparency and Clarity in Communication; and (5) Sustainability. Findings from this community case study demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a community-level consensus exercise among an equity-deserving group while providing detailed guidance for how to ensure future research and policy-based decision-making is shared across diverse knowledge users.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信