Heckel Maria, Meesters Sophie, Schildmann Eva, Ostgathe Christoph
Universität Erlangen Nürnberg, Forschungsstelle der Palliativmedizin, Erlangen, Deutschland.
Klinikum der Universität München, LMU München, Klinik und Poliklinik für Palliativmedizin, München, Deutschland.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2020 Dec;158-159:107-113. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2020.10.002. Epub 2020 Nov 20.
Patient and public participation in health research is of increasing social importance. The participation of citizens (patients, their next or interested parties) is not yet structurally anchored in Germany. This manuscript aims to present and to discuss first experiences with patient and public involvement in two palliative care centers.
In two centers, a general patient and public involvement committee (Erlangen) and a project-associated patient and public involvement group (Munich) were founded. Strategies for recruitment of potential members (public lectures, personal contact, information on the website, leaflets) were developed and applied. Sociodemographic data and motivations were assessed using survey and personal communication. 18 months after foundation citizens were asked to give feedback on participation during personal meetings.
The 20 members of the PPI committee (14 female) are between 52 and 86 years old in Erlangen. The PPI group in Munich has 7 members (5 female). Motivations to contribute are, for example, gratefulness for the care of a relative or the wish to share occupational competencies for a good purpose. Voluntary participation took place by consulting the research teams. Consultation was, among others, performed in joint sessions with brainstorming, moderated group discussions, piloting and commenting interview guides, texts or website content. Participation improved the quality of study material and data assessment instruments. Citizens appreciated that they were able to gain new information and meet people from different fields. They partly wished there was a more detailed preparation and debriefing after joint meetings. The research teams did not quantify the considerable staff and time expenses.
The recruitment strategies used have proved successful, and the experiences so far indicate a positive impact of PPI on research in the field of palliative care. Research is needed to evaluate the resources required and the effect of PPI in palliative care. On a structural level, discussion of PPI as one specification of voluntary engagement in palliative care, centralized provision of general information on PPI in palliative care and the possibilities of exchange between PPI groups and researchers of different facilities, should take place.
There is a need for networking and exchange among researchers and citizens of different project groups with experience in PPI. An institutionalized provision of expertise would pave the way for PPI in palliative research.
患者及公众参与健康研究具有日益重要的社会意义。在德国,公民(患者、其亲属或相关方)的参与尚未在制度上得到确立。本文旨在介绍并讨论在两个姑息治疗中心患者及公众参与的初步经验。
在两个中心分别成立了一个普通患者及公众参与委员会(埃尔朗根)和一个与项目相关的患者及公众参与小组(慕尼黑)。制定并应用了招募潜在成员的策略(公开讲座、个人联系、网站信息、传单)。通过调查和个人交流评估社会人口学数据及动机。在成立18个月后,邀请公民在个人会议上对参与情况给出反馈。
埃尔朗根的患者及公众参与委员会的20名成员(14名女性)年龄在52至86岁之间。慕尼黑的患者及公众参与小组有7名成员(5名女性)。参与贡献的动机包括,例如,对亲属得到照料的感激之情或出于良好目的分享职业能力的愿望。通过与研究团队协商进行自愿参与。协商方式包括联合会议中的头脑风暴、主持小组讨论、试验和评论访谈指南、文本或网站内容等。参与提高了研究材料和数据评估工具的质量。公民们表示很高兴能够获得新信息并结识来自不同领域的人。他们部分人希望在联合会议后有更详细的准备和汇报。研究团队没有量化大量的人员和时间成本。
所采用的招募策略已证明是成功的,目前的经验表明患者及公众参与对姑息治疗领域的研究有积极影响。需要开展研究以评估所需资源以及患者及公众参与在姑息治疗中的效果。在结构层面,应讨论将患者及公众参与作为姑息治疗中自愿参与的一种具体形式,集中提供姑息治疗中患者及公众参与的一般信息,以及患者及公众参与小组与不同机构研究人员之间交流的可能性。
有必要在不同项目组中有患者及公众参与经验的研究人员和公民之间建立网络并进行交流。制度化地提供专业知识将为姑息治疗研究中的患者及公众参与铺平道路。