Appelbaum Rachel D, Newcomb Anna B, Price Michelle A, Joseph Katherine, Moreno Ashley N, Hennessy Morgan, Fortin Princess, Bixby Pam J, Prentiss Sue, McConnell-Hill Alexandra, Flayter Rochelle, Dicker Rochelle A, Kozar Rosemary A, Haut Elliott R, Stein Deborah M
Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Inova Health System, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2024 Dec 11;9(1):e001466. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2024-001466. eCollection 2024.
In June 2021, the Injury Research Engagement Project (I-REP) was established. In 2022, we preformed focus group analysis with patients/caregiver and researchers that resulted in themes in preferences, motivations, and best practices to increase participation in trauma research. The importance of trust and well-established relationships was common across all groups. In this study, we aimed to further evaluate preferences regarding research procedures and outcomes, and develop a panel for sustained patient engagement.
We performed a multiphase, mixed methods study to elicit trauma stakeholders' perspectives regarding aspects of research. Previously published phase 1 involved focus group analysis. Phase 2 vignette-based surveys and phase 3 panel formation are described here. One survey was completed by patients/caregivers, and the second by trauma researchers. We compared the responses using independent t-tests. This was followed by a webinar and development of an I-REP panel of patients/caregivers.
60 patients/caregivers and 114 researchers participated in the online surveys, with completion rates of 68% and 69%, respectively. The majority of patients/caregivers were >45 years, female (66.7%), and >3 years out from their or their family member's injury (68.6%). The majority of the researchers were >35 years and male (56.2%). Participants were asked to gauge their perceptions of different research scenarios. The analysis identified themes emerging across groups. Several survey findings differed from phase 1, including motivations to participate (payment) and consent preferences (timing, approach). Racial and ethnic demographics of the participants were not collected.
Engaging trauma stakeholders results in research more relevant to patients' needs and priorities. Qualitative engagement methods that intentionally include a more diverse population and determining the appropriate format for specific questions may lead to results that are be more generalizable. The educational webinar was well received, and several participants opted to serve as I-REP panelists to collaborate with trauma researchers moving forward.
IV.
2021年6月，伤害研究参与项目（I-REP）成立。2022年，我们对患者/护理人员和研究人员进行了焦点小组分析，得出了关于增加创伤研究参与度的偏好、动机和最佳实践的主题。信任和稳固关系的重要性在所有群体中都很常见。在本研究中，我们旨在进一步评估对研究程序和结果的偏好，并建立一个持续患者参与的小组。
我们进行了一项多阶段、混合方法研究，以了解创伤利益相关者对研究方面的看法。之前发表的第一阶段涉及焦点小组分析。这里描述第二阶段基于 vignette 的调查和第三阶段小组组建。一项调查由患者/护理人员完成，第二项由创伤研究人员完成。我们使用独立 t 检验比较了回答。随后举办了一次网络研讨会，并组建了一个患者/护理人员的 I-REP 小组。
60名患者/护理人员和114名研究人员参与了在线调查，完成率分别为68%和69%。大多数患者/护理人员年龄超过45岁，女性（66.7%），且自其本人或其家庭成员受伤已超过3年（68.6%）。大多数研究人员年龄超过35岁，男性（56.2%）。参与者被要求评估他们对不同研究场景的看法。分析确定了各群体中出现的主题。一些调查结果与第一阶段不同，包括参与动机（报酬）和同意偏好（时间、方式）。未收集参与者的种族和族裔人口统计数据。
让创伤利益相关者参与会使研究更符合患者的需求和优先事项。有意纳入更多样化人群并确定特定问题合适形式的定性参与方法可能会得出更具普遍性的结果。教育网络研讨会很受欢迎，一些参与者选择担任 I-REP 小组成员，以便与创伤研究人员进一步合作。
IV。
