Cargando…

Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success

BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence for effective patient-researcher collaboration in basic research is lacking. This study aims to explore good working models and impact of patient involvement in basic rheumatology research and to identify barriers and facilitators. METHOD: A responsive evaluation of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Wit, Maarten P. T., Koenders, M. I., Neijland, Y., van den Hoogen, F. H. J., van der Kraan, P. M., van de Loo, F. A. J., Berkers, H., Lieon, M., van Caam, A., van den Ende, C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540713/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41927-022-00296-6
_version_ 1784803765225783296
author de Wit, Maarten P. T.
Koenders, M. I.
Neijland, Y.
van den Hoogen, F. H. J.
van der Kraan, P. M.
van de Loo, F. A. J.
Berkers, H.
Lieon, M.
van Caam, A.
van den Ende, C.
author_facet de Wit, Maarten P. T.
Koenders, M. I.
Neijland, Y.
van den Hoogen, F. H. J.
van der Kraan, P. M.
van de Loo, F. A. J.
Berkers, H.
Lieon, M.
van Caam, A.
van den Ende, C.
author_sort de Wit, Maarten P. T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence for effective patient-researcher collaboration in basic research is lacking. This study aims to explore good working models and impact of patient involvement in basic rheumatology research and to identify barriers and facilitators. METHOD: A responsive evaluation of a three years’ participatory research project in a basic and translational laboratory research setting. Several working models for patient involvement were piloted and adapted if considered necessary. The study comprised surveys, interviews, training days, meeting reports, Q-sort exercises and field notes, and regular reflective team sessions with participant involvement. A qualitative analysis using thematic coding focused on impact, barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Thirteen patient research partners (PRPs) and fifteen basic researchers participated. PRPs experienced basic research as fascinating though complex to understand. Their initial role was mostly listening and asking questions. After several meetings equal and more meaningful relationships emerged. Researchers’ motivation increased by listening to patient stories. They learned about disease impact on daily life and to speak in understandable language. This enabled PRPs to learn about research and the pathogenesis of their disease. It inspired them to stay involved over a longer period. After three years, both parties preferred 1:1 contacts over collaboration in team meetings. A common language and respectful communication were important facilitators. Limitations were the complexity of disease processes for patients and the time commitment for researchers. Impact was reported as a sincere dialogue with multiple advantages for patients and researchers, and to a lesser extent than expected on the research process and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patient involvement contributes to motivating young scientists in performing basic research projects. Patients and researchers valued the benefits of long-term one-on-one collaboration. These benefits outweigh the lack of direct impact on basic research goals and performance. A plain language summary of the abstract is available (as) online Additional file 1. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41927-022-00296-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9540713
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95407132022-10-08 Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success de Wit, Maarten P. T. Koenders, M. I. Neijland, Y. van den Hoogen, F. H. J. van der Kraan, P. M. van de Loo, F. A. J. Berkers, H. Lieon, M. van Caam, A. van den Ende, C. BMC Rheumatol Research Article BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence for effective patient-researcher collaboration in basic research is lacking. This study aims to explore good working models and impact of patient involvement in basic rheumatology research and to identify barriers and facilitators. METHOD: A responsive evaluation of a three years’ participatory research project in a basic and translational laboratory research setting. Several working models for patient involvement were piloted and adapted if considered necessary. The study comprised surveys, interviews, training days, meeting reports, Q-sort exercises and field notes, and regular reflective team sessions with participant involvement. A qualitative analysis using thematic coding focused on impact, barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: Thirteen patient research partners (PRPs) and fifteen basic researchers participated. PRPs experienced basic research as fascinating though complex to understand. Their initial role was mostly listening and asking questions. After several meetings equal and more meaningful relationships emerged. Researchers’ motivation increased by listening to patient stories. They learned about disease impact on daily life and to speak in understandable language. This enabled PRPs to learn about research and the pathogenesis of their disease. It inspired them to stay involved over a longer period. After three years, both parties preferred 1:1 contacts over collaboration in team meetings. A common language and respectful communication were important facilitators. Limitations were the complexity of disease processes for patients and the time commitment for researchers. Impact was reported as a sincere dialogue with multiple advantages for patients and researchers, and to a lesser extent than expected on the research process and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patient involvement contributes to motivating young scientists in performing basic research projects. Patients and researchers valued the benefits of long-term one-on-one collaboration. These benefits outweigh the lack of direct impact on basic research goals and performance. A plain language summary of the abstract is available (as) online Additional file 1. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41927-022-00296-6. BioMed Central 2022-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9540713/ /pubmed/36203190 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41927-022-00296-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
de Wit, Maarten P. T.
Koenders, M. I.
Neijland, Y.
van den Hoogen, F. H. J.
van der Kraan, P. M.
van de Loo, F. A. J.
Berkers, H.
Lieon, M.
van Caam, A.
van den Ende, C.
Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title_full Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title_fullStr Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title_full_unstemmed Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title_short Patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at Nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
title_sort patient involvement in basic rheumatology research at nijmegen: a three year’s responsive evaluation of added value, pitfalls and conditions for success
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540713/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41927-022-00296-6
work_keys_str_mv AT dewitmaartenpt patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT koendersmi patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT neijlandy patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT vandenhoogenfhj patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT vanderkraanpm patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT vandeloofaj patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT berkersh patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT lieonm patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT vancaama patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess
AT vandenendec patientinvolvementinbasicrheumatologyresearchatnijmegenathreeyearsresponsiveevaluationofaddedvaluepitfallsandconditionsforsuccess