Blake Holly, Abbott-Fleming Victoria, Greaves Sarah, Somerset Sarah, Chaplin Wendy J, Wainwright Elaine, Walker-Bone Karen
School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK.
Res Involv Engagem. 2025 Jul 15;11(1):81. doi: 10.1186/s40900-025-00757-5.
Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is essential for the design, delivery and dissemination of high-quality, meaningful research. However, reporting of PPIE contributions is seldom transparent or consistent. We aimed to document and critically reflect on the process of embedding robust PPIE throughout every stage of the research cycle in the co-creation and evaluation of the Pain-at-Work (PAW) Toolkit, a digital resource to support working age adults with self-managing chronic pain at work.
Using the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2-SF) checklist we describe and reflect on PPIE input into four phases of the PAW Toolkit development and testing taking place over five years, all co-led by PPIE-partners, including: (1) Co-Creation: with stakeholder consultation (n = 27), surveys with employees (n = 274) and employers (n = 107), expert peer review (n = 40), (2) Prototype Evaluation: with end-user testing (n = 104), end-user interviews (n = 15), expert peer reviews (n = 15), (3) Review and Update: with a public concept mapping exercise (n = 20) and expert peer reviews (n = 15), (4) Feasibility Testing: with PPIE-partners (n = 2), PPIE-members (n = 5), PPIE-contributors (n = 10).
PPIE was successfully embedded at every stage of the research cycle. Our PPIE-partners co-led activities to gather the views of diverse stakeholders (PPIE-contributors) such as healthcare professionals, employers, and people with lived experience of chronic pain. We outline 'how' PPIE took place at each phase, and 'who' was involved in each activity. We describe PPIE results in terms of the impact of PPIE on PAW Toolkit development (Phase 1-3) and the research process (Phase 1-4).
Our PPIE partnerships and shared decision-making led to the co-creation, update and evaluation of the PAW Toolkit, an intervention which is appropriate, meaningful and relevant to working-age adults living with chronic pain. We present components for successful PPIE, and map our Pain-at-Work PPIE to recommended components. Components for successful PPIE, challenges and mitigations are reflected upon. PPIE enhanced the 'real-world' value of our intervention and methodological rigour of the research processes. Our worked example of PPIE and transferable recommendations could be used to guide other researchers embarking on national or international health research. TRIAL REGISTRATION (PHASE 4): ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05838677; registered 01/05/2023 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05838677 .
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1- https://doi.org/10.2196/51474 .
患者及公众参与和介入(PPIE)对于高质量、有意义的研究的设计、实施和传播至关重要。然而,PPIE贡献的报告很少是透明或一致的。我们旨在记录并批判性地反思在工作中疼痛(PAW)工具包的共同创建和评估过程中,如何在研究周期的每个阶段融入稳健的PPIE,PAW工具包是一种数字资源,用于支持工作年龄段的成年人在工作中自我管理慢性疼痛。
我们使用《患者及公众参与报告指南》(GRIPP2-SF)清单,描述并反思了PPIE在PAW工具包开发和测试的四个阶段中的投入,该过程历时五年,均由PPIE合作伙伴共同牵头,包括:(1)共同创建:进行利益相关者咨询(n = 27)、对员工(n = 274)和雇主(n = 107)进行调查、专家同行评审(n = 40);(2)原型评估:进行最终用户测试(n = 104)、最终用户访谈(n = 15)、专家同行评审(n = 15);(3)审查与更新:进行公众概念映射活动(n = 20)和专家同行评审(n = 15);(4)可行性测试:与PPIE合作伙伴(n = 2)、PPIE成员(n = 5)、PPIE贡献者(n = 10)合作。
PPIE成功地融入了研究周期的每个阶段。我们的PPIE合作伙伴共同牵头开展活动,收集了医疗保健专业人员、雇主和有慢性疼痛亲身经历者等不同利益相关者(PPIE贡献者)的意见。我们概述了PPIE在每个阶段是“如何”进行的,以及每项活动中“谁”参与其中。我们从PPIE对PAW工具包开发(第1 - 3阶段)和研究过程(第1 - 4阶段)的影响方面描述了PPIE的结果。
我们的PPIE伙伴关系和共同决策促成了PAW工具包的共同创建、更新和评估,该干预措施适合、有意义且与患有慢性疼痛的工作年龄段成年人相关。我们提出了成功实施PPIE的要素,并将我们的工作中疼痛PPIE映射到推荐要素上。对成功实施PPIE的要素、挑战及应对措施进行了反思。PPIE增强了我们干预措施的“现实世界”价值以及研究过程的方法严谨性。我们的PPIE工作示例和可转移建议可用于指导其他开展国家或国际健康研究的人员。试验注册(第4阶段):ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05838677;于2023年5月1日注册https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05838677 。
国际注册报告标识符(IRRID):DERR1 - https://doi.org/10.2196/51474 。