Search

Background: UK Hospital Trusts are charged with increasing patients' research awareness and willingness to take part in research. This includes implementing strategies to encourage patient-initiated enquiries about participation., Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a research statement inserted in outpatient letters in one clinical service, and to derive suggestions on potential steps towards increasing patient-initiated recruitment., Setting: A medical outpatient clinic of a research-active hospital trust, serving an inner-city multi-ethnic population across two boroughs., Methods: Pre-intervention and post-intervention questionnaires were administered face-to-face to new patients. Questionnaires included closed questions and one open comments section. Data were analysed for frequencies, with thematic coding of open-ended responses., Results: The response rates were 87% for the pre-intervention survey and 92% for the post-intervention survey. In the post-intervention survey, 85% of patients did not notice the research statement in the letter. More than half found the statement "a little unclear," whilst one-third considered it "clear." Three-quarters of respondents perceived the statement to be "a little helpful." Only one person enquired about participating in clinical research having read the statement in the outpatient letter., Conclusion: The analysis suggests that simple, single-solution approaches such as including research statements in outpatient letters are unlikely to be sufficient to significantly facilitate patient-initiated recruitment. Recruitment efforts need to take into consideration the diversity of patient constituencies including the reasons they seek health care, and how patients can meaningfully access information (research literacy)., (© 2017 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The policy imperative to engage the public and patients in research can be seen as part of a wider shift in the research environment. This study addresses the question: Has there been a shift in attitudes to Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and Public Engagement in Science (PES) amongst researchers?, Methods: Attitudes to PPI and PES within a cluster of three NIHR supported Biomedical Research Centres were explored through in-depth interviews with 19 researchers., Results: Participants distinguished PPI (as an activity involving patients and carers in research projects and programmes) from PES (as an activity that aims to communicate research findings to the public, engage the public with broader issues of science policy or promote a greater understanding of the role of science in society). While participants demonstrated a range of attitudes to these practices, they shared a resistance to sharing power and control of the research process with the public and patients., Conclusion: While researchers were prepared to engage with the public and patients and listed the advantages of engagement, the study revealed few differences in their underlying attitudes towards the role of society in science (and science in society) to those reported in previous studies. To the participants science remains the preserve of scientists, with patients and the public invited to 'tinker at the edges'., (© 2014 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Lay involvement in implementation of research evidence into practice may include using research findings to guide individual care, as well as involvement in research processes and policy development. Little is known about the conditions required for such involvement., Aim: To assess stroke survivors' research awareness, use of research evidence in their own care and readiness to be involved in research processes., Methods: Cross sectional survey of stroke survivors participating in population-based stroke registers in six European centres., Results: The response rate was 74% (481/647). Reasons for participation in register research included responding to clinician request (56%) and to 'give something back' (19%); however, 20% were unaware that they were participating in a stroke register. Research awareness was generally low: 57% did not know the purpose of the register they had been recruited to; 73% reported not having received results from the register they took part in; 60% did not know about any research on stroke care. Few participants (7.6%) used research evidence during their consultations with a doctor. The 34% of participants who were interested in being involved in research were younger, more highly educated and already research aware., Conclusions: Across Europe, stroke survivors already participating in research appear ill informed about stroke research. Researchers, healthcare professionals and patient associations need to improve how research results are communicated to patient populations and research participants, and to raise awareness of the relationship between research evidence and increased quality of care., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)