Moving beyond tokenism: Sustaining engagement of persons living with dementia in identifying emergency research priorities.

Jacqueline Sandoval, Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi, Christopher R Carpenter, Manish N Shah, Jeffrey Dussetschleger, Scott Dresden, Michael Ellenbogen, Heidi Gil, Naveena Jaspal, Deborah Jobe, Allan Vann, Teresa Webb, Ula Hwang
{"title":"Moving beyond tokenism: Sustaining engagement of persons living with dementia in identifying emergency research priorities.","authors":"Jacqueline Sandoval, Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi, Christopher R Carpenter, Manish N Shah, Jeffrey Dussetschleger, Scott Dresden, Michael Ellenbogen, Heidi Gil, Naveena Jaspal, Deborah Jobe, Allan Vann, Teresa Webb, Ula Hwang","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network 2.0-Advancing Dementia Care (GEAR 2.0-ADC) aims to advance research efforts to improve the emergency care of persons living with dementia (PLWDs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To support this objective, GEAR 2.0-ADC convened a virtual consensus conference to prioritize emergency care research opportunities for PLWDs inclusive of perspectives of PLWDs to ensure identification of research gaps in response to their experiences and priorities. Inclusion of PLWDs as research partners is increasingly recognized as a best practice, however, approaches to facilitating consensus participation are lacking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Best practices for supporting the engagement of PLWDs in a consensus conference, applied across its three phases (pre-conference, during the conference, and post-conference), include: establishing a learning environment focused on research priorities before the event, presenting information in ways that align with participants' learning preferences while accommodating cognitive impairments, and providing multiple opportunities and methods for gathering post-conference feedback from PLWDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>These strategies were identified by PLWDs and care partners (CPs) through semi-structured interviews, who were involved in the convening process, aimed at exploring ways to enhance facilitation techniques for participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Additionally, these summarized insights aim to encourage the use of community-engaged approaches in discussions and consensus-building around research priorities in emergency care, particularly for PLWDs and their CPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19269","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network 2.0-Advancing Dementia Care (GEAR 2.0-ADC) aims to advance research efforts to improve the emergency care of persons living with dementia (PLWDs).

Objective: To support this objective, GEAR 2.0-ADC convened a virtual consensus conference to prioritize emergency care research opportunities for PLWDs inclusive of perspectives of PLWDs to ensure identification of research gaps in response to their experiences and priorities. Inclusion of PLWDs as research partners is increasingly recognized as a best practice, however, approaches to facilitating consensus participation are lacking.

Methods: Best practices for supporting the engagement of PLWDs in a consensus conference, applied across its three phases (pre-conference, during the conference, and post-conference), include: establishing a learning environment focused on research priorities before the event, presenting information in ways that align with participants' learning preferences while accommodating cognitive impairments, and providing multiple opportunities and methods for gathering post-conference feedback from PLWDs.

Results: These strategies were identified by PLWDs and care partners (CPs) through semi-structured interviews, who were involved in the convening process, aimed at exploring ways to enhance facilitation techniques for participants.

Conclusion: Additionally, these summarized insights aim to encourage the use of community-engaged approaches in discussions and consensus-building around research priorities in emergency care, particularly for PLWDs and their CPs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越形式主义:让痴呆症患者持续参与确定紧急研究重点。
导言:老年急救护理应用研究网络 2.0--推进痴呆症护理(GEAR 2.0-ADC)旨在推进研究工作,改善痴呆症患者(PLWDs)的急救护理:为支持这一目标,GEAR 2.0-ADC 召开了一次虚拟共识会议,以优先考虑针对痴呆症患者的紧急护理研究机会,其中包括痴呆症患者的观点,以确保根据他们的经验和优先事项确定研究缺口。将 PLWDs 纳入研究合作伙伴越来越被认为是一种最佳实践,然而,目前还缺乏促进共识参与的方法:在共识会议的三个阶段(会前、会中和会后),支持 PLWDs 参与会议的最佳实践包括:在会前建立一个以研究重点为中心的学习环境,以符合与会者学习偏好的方式展示信息,同时照顾到认知障碍,以及提供多种机会和方法收集 PLWDs 的会后反馈:这些策略是由参与召集过程的 PLWDs 和护理伙伴(CPs)通过半结构式访谈确定的,旨在探索如何提高为参与者提供便利的技巧:此外,这些总结的见解旨在鼓励在讨论中使用社区参与的方法,并围绕紧急护理中的研究重点达成共识,特别是针对 PLWDs 及其 CPs。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Innovation in delirium care: A standardized intervention to reverse inattention using touch and movement. Accelerating the pace of elder justice policy to meet the needs of a growing aging population. Age Self Care, a program to improve aging in place through group learning and incremental behavior change: Preliminary data. Beyond usability: Designing digital health interventions for implementation with older adults. Defining key deprescribing measures from electronic health data: A multisite data harmonization project.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1