Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action最新文献

Background: Schools are rich sites for collaborations between health and educational sectors.

Objectives: To identify lessons learned from formation of a community-academic partnership and application of community-based participatory research (CBPR) to develop a model that integrates community health workers into schools.

Methods: Individuals from an academic medical center, a large public school district, and a community-based research institute applied CBPR principles to reimagine schools as a place for improving the health of children.

Lessons learned: Three lessons emerged. Leveraging each team member's expertise centered the partnership on community strengths, co-learning, and stakeholder engagement. Adherence to CBPR's principles of power sharing and equity helped navigate the challenges of collaboration between large institutions. Early focus on sustainability helped address unexpected issues, build capacity, and boost advocacy.

Conclusions: This partnership demonstrates how CBPR fosters conditions in which equitable partnerships between research institutions and public schools can thrive to promote childhood health.

Underserved communities have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Project Promoting Engagement and COVID-19 Testing for Health (PEACH) study was designed to understand the attitudes, beliefs, and infrastructure associated with COVID-19 risk, testing, and prevention behaviors in people living with, caring for, or at risk for type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this joint community-academic partnered manuscript is to share lessons learned for maintaining community partnerships through the challenging times of a pandemic. New and existing community partners were invited to share their perceptions about the facilitators and barriers of partnering with academia during the COVID-19 public health crisis. Key facilitators included those partners felt heard and their input valued. And the changing nature and demands in response to the pandemic on the partners' responsibilities were among the key challenges. Successful maintenance of the partnerships required flexibility, creativity, and a willingness to adapt engagement as community partners responded to the needs of their communities.

Background: People with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are at high risk for unmet health care needs and face barriers to equitable care, yet few health professions students receive adequate training to meet these needs.

Objectives: An interactive panel discussion with Special Olympics Pennsylvania (SOPA) athletes and staff was planned and implemented so that health professions students/trainees would gain knowledge of IDD, health barriers, SOPA resources, and volunteer opportunities.

Methods: Panelists included two SOPA athletes and their mentors; questions solicited responses about personal health care experiences (Fall 2019). Attendees completed a mixed-methods post-event survey capturing event satisfaction, reflections, and interest in learning more about patients with IDD.

Results: Sixty individuals attended, and 43 (72%) completed post-event evaluation. Attendees reported high satisfaction (88%), desire for future trainings (100%), and interest in learning about communicating (88%), providing care (88%), and addressing IDD health barriers (91%).

Conclusions: Collaborative community panels could be effective in engaging health care students in discussion about caring for patients with IDD.

Background: Community-partnered participatory research (CPPR) is a research approach that supports equitable collaboration of community and academic co-leaders in research and policy. Despite CPPR's 25-year history, infrastructure supporting community members in bidirectional learning has not been formalized.

Objective: This paper describes processes and procedures using CPPR to plan conferences to develop community leadership training infrastructure.

Methods: We utilized rapid ethnographic analysis to examine conference planning processes for community leadership in CPPR. Community and academic leaders in Los Angeles, New Orleans, and Chicago met weekly over two months to plan, given COVID-19, three Zoom conferences on a leadership training institute for CPPR, with planning for (1) community co-leadership in research and policy; (2) local and national CPPR programs; and (3) models for bidirectional training.

Results: The planning process emphasized bidirectional learning for community and academic members for research and services/policy to benefit communities, within a Community Leadership Institute for Equity (C-LIFE) to promote equity and power sharing for community leaders. The planning process identified major themes of framing of C-LIFE conference planning goals, developing the conference structure, promoting equity and diversity, envisioning the future of CPPR, challenges, collaborations, future curriculum ideas for C-LIFE, evaluation and next-steps for Zoom conferences in November 2020.

Conclusions: It was feasible to use CPPR to plan Zoom conferences to promote community leadership training across multiple sites. Key planning themes included promoting equity, addressing structural racism, bidirectional learning and integrating community, academic, and policy priorities with community co-leaders as change agents.

Community-engaged research often poses challenges due to exactly those qualities that make it desirable: it provides a new model of research that differs in many ways from top-down, university-led, prospectively designed approaches. While many have discussed the challenges to conducting community-engaged research, few have provided precise and generalizable lessons for how to surmount these challenges. Here we discuss the challenges experienced in a project that was community-engaged at three levels: 1) a research team consisting of an academic and a community partner as well as a community and academic research assistant, 2) the research team engaged with a Community Advisory Board called the CBOP-CERB (Community Based Organization Partners-Community Ethics Research Board) throughout the project, and 3) the research involved recruiting community participants from an area with a historical distrust of researchers and research: Flint Michigan. We also discuss administrative challenges that this multilevel community-engagement posed. Most important, we provide practical lessons in order for future community-engaged research to avoid or mitigate many of these challenges.

Background: Implementation of evidence-based interventions to reduce depression among uninsured Latinx patients who are at high risk of depression are rare.

Objectives: Our goal was to evaluate Strong Minds, a language and culturally tailored, evidence-based intervention adapted from cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for mild-moderate depression and anxiety, delivered by community health workers (CHWs) in Spanish to uninsured Latinx immigrants.

Methods: As part of the pilot, 35 participants, recruited from a free community primary care clinic, completed Strong Minds. Assessments and poststudy interviews were conducted. Paired t-tests were used to assess change of depressive symptoms at 3 and 6 months.

Lessons learned: CHW delivery of depression care to this population was feasible and among those who completed the program, preliminary evidence of depression outcomes suggests potential benefit. CHWs had specific training and support needs related to mental health care delivery.

Conclusions: Further implementation studies of depression care interventions using CHWs for underserved Latinx is needed.

Objectives: To review empirical and peer-reviewed scholarly articles incorporating community-based participatory research approaches and examining discourses of how power differentials are interrogated, negotiated, and redressed within the partnerships using scoping review methodology following The Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

Data sources: Articles were identified across five online databases: Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science.

Review methods: Keywords used in the search strategy were ("Community-Based Participatory Research" OR "Participa-tory Action Research"). Peer-reviewed scholarly articles discussing in-depth power differentials within the partnership published in English between 2010 and 2020 were included.

Results: Findings indicate scholars use critical reflexive qualitative methodologies to recognize and raise relevant questions of power issues between researchers and community stakeholders. Examination of individual biases, assumptions, and exertion of hierarchical top-down power is identified extensively. There is limited analysis on institutional and interdependent power. As a result of raising questions regarding power issues, individual actions to address emerging tensions and conflicts were reported. However, discussions on researchers' efforts to effect institutional and structural changes to redress power imbalances were limited.

Conclusions: Building strong and equitable participatory action research collaborations between researchers and community stakeholders remains an arena of continuous struggle. This review offers some insights and relevant implications to better address power issues within participatory action research partnerships and inform the work of professionals engaged in the development, implementation, and evaluation of health promotion initiatives and policies.