Anne Killett, Kerry Micklewright, Rachael Carroll, Gizdem Akdur, Emily Allinson, Liz Crellin, Kaat de Corte, Margaret Fox, Barbara Hanratty, Lisa Irvine, Liz Jones, Marlene Kelly, Therese Lloyd, Julienne Meyer, Karen Spilsbury, Ann-Marie Towers, Freya Tracey, John Willmott, Claire Goodman
{"title":"公众参与加强安老院研究养老院最小数据集的合作。","authors":"Anne Killett, Kerry Micklewright, Rachael Carroll, Gizdem Akdur, Emily Allinson, Liz Crellin, Kaat de Corte, Margaret Fox, Barbara Hanratty, Lisa Irvine, Liz Jones, Marlene Kelly, Therese Lloyd, Julienne Meyer, Karen Spilsbury, Ann-Marie Towers, Freya Tracey, John Willmott, Claire Goodman","doi":"10.1111/hex.70140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Information on care home residents in England is captured in numerous data sets (care home records, General Practitioner records, community nursing, etc.) but little of this information is currently analysed in a way that is useful for care providers, current or future residents and families or that realises the potential of data to enhance care provision. The DACHA study aimed to develop and test a minimum data set (MDS) which would bring together data that is useful to support and improve care and facilitate research. It is that utility that underscores the importance of meaningful public involvement (PI) with the range of groups of people affected. This paper analyses the involvement of family members of care home residents and care home staff through a PI Panel.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The objective for the PI activities was to consistently bring the knowledge and perspectives of family members and care home staff to influence the ongoing design and conduct of the DACHA study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The bespoke methods of PI included a dedicated PI team and a PI Panel of public contributors. Meetings were recorded and minutes agreed, resulting actions were tracked and reflections on the PI recorded. A democratic, social relations approach was used to frame the analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A PI panel met 17 times. All meetings included both family members and care home staff. Analysis of the records and reflections developed the following themes about the operation of the PI: deepened understanding of the data environment in care homes; Influence on the pilot MDS; aiming for best research practices with care homes; personal/professional development for PI members; expectations of the project. Learning points for future research projects are developed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>PI shaped the design and conduct of the DACHA study, grounding it in the needs and perspectives of people using and providing social care. Data research has a huge responsibility to accurately incorporate relevant public perspectives. There is an implicit assumption that records and data are objective and ‘speak for themselves’ however there can be unintended consequences from introduction of new data requirements in practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Public contributors to this manuscript include family members of older people living in care homes and staff of care homes. The wider study also involved as the public, older people living in care homes. Public contributors helped develop the project, contributed throughout the conduct of the study and some chose to be involved in preparing this manuscript.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11729378/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Involvement to Enhance Care Home Research; Collaboration on a Minimum Data Set for Care Homes\",\"authors\":\"Anne Killett, Kerry Micklewright, Rachael Carroll, Gizdem Akdur, Emily Allinson, Liz Crellin, Kaat de Corte, Margaret Fox, Barbara Hanratty, Lisa Irvine, Liz Jones, Marlene Kelly, Therese Lloyd, Julienne Meyer, Karen Spilsbury, Ann-Marie Towers, Freya Tracey, John Willmott, Claire Goodman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hex.70140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Information on care home residents in England is captured in numerous data sets (care home records, General Practitioner records, community nursing, etc.) but little of this information is currently analysed in a way that is useful for care providers, current or future residents and families or that realises the potential of data to enhance care provision. The DACHA study aimed to develop and test a minimum data set (MDS) which would bring together data that is useful to support and improve care and facilitate research. It is that utility that underscores the importance of meaningful public involvement (PI) with the range of groups of people affected. This paper analyses the involvement of family members of care home residents and care home staff through a PI Panel.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The objective for the PI activities was to consistently bring the knowledge and perspectives of family members and care home staff to influence the ongoing design and conduct of the DACHA study.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The bespoke methods of PI included a dedicated PI team and a PI Panel of public contributors. Meetings were recorded and minutes agreed, resulting actions were tracked and reflections on the PI recorded. A democratic, social relations approach was used to frame the analysis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A PI panel met 17 times. All meetings included both family members and care home staff. Analysis of the records and reflections developed the following themes about the operation of the PI: deepened understanding of the data environment in care homes; Influence on the pilot MDS; aiming for best research practices with care homes; personal/professional development for PI members; expectations of the project. Learning points for future research projects are developed.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>PI shaped the design and conduct of the DACHA study, grounding it in the needs and perspectives of people using and providing social care. Data research has a huge responsibility to accurately incorporate relevant public perspectives. There is an implicit assumption that records and data are objective and ‘speak for themselves’ however there can be unintended consequences from introduction of new data requirements in practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\\n \\n <p>Public contributors to this manuscript include family members of older people living in care homes and staff of care homes. The wider study also involved as the public, older people living in care homes. Public contributors helped develop the project, contributed throughout the conduct of the study and some chose to be involved in preparing this manuscript.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Expectations\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11729378/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Expectations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70140\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Public Involvement to Enhance Care Home Research; Collaboration on a Minimum Data Set for Care Homes
Introduction
Information on care home residents in England is captured in numerous data sets (care home records, General Practitioner records, community nursing, etc.) but little of this information is currently analysed in a way that is useful for care providers, current or future residents and families or that realises the potential of data to enhance care provision. The DACHA study aimed to develop and test a minimum data set (MDS) which would bring together data that is useful to support and improve care and facilitate research. It is that utility that underscores the importance of meaningful public involvement (PI) with the range of groups of people affected. This paper analyses the involvement of family members of care home residents and care home staff through a PI Panel.
Objectives
The objective for the PI activities was to consistently bring the knowledge and perspectives of family members and care home staff to influence the ongoing design and conduct of the DACHA study.
Methods
The bespoke methods of PI included a dedicated PI team and a PI Panel of public contributors. Meetings were recorded and minutes agreed, resulting actions were tracked and reflections on the PI recorded. A democratic, social relations approach was used to frame the analysis.
Results
A PI panel met 17 times. All meetings included both family members and care home staff. Analysis of the records and reflections developed the following themes about the operation of the PI: deepened understanding of the data environment in care homes; Influence on the pilot MDS; aiming for best research practices with care homes; personal/professional development for PI members; expectations of the project. Learning points for future research projects are developed.
Conclusions
PI shaped the design and conduct of the DACHA study, grounding it in the needs and perspectives of people using and providing social care. Data research has a huge responsibility to accurately incorporate relevant public perspectives. There is an implicit assumption that records and data are objective and ‘speak for themselves’ however there can be unintended consequences from introduction of new data requirements in practice.
Patient or Public Contribution
Public contributors to this manuscript include family members of older people living in care homes and staff of care homes. The wider study also involved as the public, older people living in care homes. Public contributors helped develop the project, contributed throughout the conduct of the study and some chose to be involved in preparing this manuscript.
期刊介绍:
Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including:
• Person-centred care and quality improvement
• Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management
• Public perceptions of health services
• Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting
• Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation
• Empowerment and consumerism
• Patients'' role in safety and quality
• Patient and public role in health services research
• Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy
Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.