Community of trauma care partnering with stakeholders to improve injury outcomes: focus group analysis

Author:

Appelbaum Rachel DORCID,Newcomb Anna,Joseph Katherine,Hennessy Morgan,Fortin Princess,Bixby Pam J,Prentiss Sue,McConnell-Hill Alexandra,Flayter Rochelle,Price Michelle AORCID,Dicker Rochelle,Kozar RosemaryORCID,Haut Elliott RORCID,Stein Deborah MORCID

Abstract

IntroductionEngaging trauma survivors/caregivers results in research findings that are more relevant to patients’ needs and priorities. Although their perspectives increase research significance, there is a lack of understanding about how best to incorporate their insights. We aimed to capture stakeholder perspectives to ensure research is meaningful, respectful, and relevant to the injured patient and their caregivers.MethodsA multiphase, inductive exploratory qualitative study was performed, the first phase of which is described here. Virtual focus groups to elicit stakeholder perspectives and preferences were conducted across 19 trauma centers in the USA during 2022. Discussion topics were chosen to identify patients’ motivation to join research studies, preferences regarding consent, suggestions for increasing diversity and access, and feelings regarding outcomes, efficacy, and exception from informed consent. The focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed to identify the range of perspectives expressed and any common themes that emerged.ResultsTen 90-minute focus groups included patients/caregiver (n=21/1) and researchers (n=14). Data analysis identified common themes emerging across groups. The importance of trust and preexisting relationships with the clinical care team were the most common themes across all groups.ConclusionOur findings reveal common themes in preferences, motivations, and best practices to increase patient/caregiver participation in trauma research. The project’s next phases are distribution of a vignette-based survey to establish broad stakeholder consensus; education and dissemination activities to share strategies that increase research engagement and relevance for patients; and the formation of a panel of patients to support future research endeavors.Level of evidenceLevel IV.

Funder

Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Eugene Washington PCORI Engagement Award

Publisher

BMJ

Reference30 articles.

1. The informed consent process and the use of the exception to informed consent in the clinical trial of diaspirin cross-linked hemoglobin (Dclhb) in severe traumatic hemorrhagic shock;Sloan;Acad Emerg Med,1999

2. Impediments to Obtaining Informed Consent for Clinical Research in Trauma Patients

3. Exception from informed consent for emergency research

4. Federal Regulations . Protection of human subjects informed consent and waiver of informed consent requirements in certain emergency research: final rules (21 CFR part 5024 and 45 CFR part 46101). 1996. Available: http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RunningClinicalTrials/ucm118995.htm

5. Patients’ Perspectives of Enrollment in Research Without Consent

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3