Patient and Public Engagement in Integrated Knowledge Translation Research: Are we there yet?

Abstract

Plain English summaryThere have been many attempts to improve how healthcare services are developed and delivered. Despite this, we know that there are many gaps and differences in practice and that these can lead to poor patient outcomes. In addition, there are also concerns that research is being undertaken that does not reflects the realities or needs of those using healthcare services, and that the use of research findings in practice is slow. As such, shared approaches to research, such as integrated knowledge translation, are being used.Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is a research approach that brings together researchers, along with other stakeholders that have knowledge about a particular healthcare issue. Stakeholders may include healthcare providers and policy-makers. More recently, there has been a growing awareness of the need to include patients and members of the public within research processes. These collaborative and patient-oriented research approaches are seen as a way to develop research that tackles ongoing gaps in practice and reflect the insights, needs and priorities of those most affected by health research outcomes. Despite great support, little is known about how these major research approaches are connected, or how they may bring about improvements in the development and use of research evidence. In this paper, we examine how IKT and patient engagement processes are linked, as well as exploring where differences exist. Through this, we highlight opportunities for greater patient engagement in IKT research and to identify areas that need to be understood further.AbstractHealthcare organizations across the world are being increasingly challenged to develop and implement services that are evidence-based and bring about improvement in patient and health service outcomes. Despite an increasing emphasis upon evidence-based practice, large variations in practice remain and gaps pervade in the creation and application of knowledge that improves outcomes. More collaborative models of health research have emerged over recent years, including integrated knowledge translation (IKT), whereby partnerships with key knowledge users are developed to enhance the responsiveness and application of the findings. Likewise, the meaningful engagement of patients, in addition to the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes and priorities, has been hailed as another mechanism to improve the relevance, impact and efficiency of research.Collectively, both IKT and patient engagement processes provide a vehicle to support research that can address health disparities and improve the delivery of effective and responsive healthcare services. However, the evidence to support their impact is limited and while these approaches are inextricably connected through their engagement focus, it is unclear how IKT and patient engagement processes are linked conceptually, theoretically, and practically. In this paper, we will begin to critically examine some of the linkages and tensions that exist between IKT and patient-eng...

Engaging young African American women breast cancer survivors: A novel storytelling approach to identify patient‐centred research priorities

“…Patient engagement is an established strategy that can be used to inform research to address health disparities and improve the delivery of effective and responsive health‐care services . Regardless, there is limited consensus on how best to engage patients …”

“…Patient engagement is an established strategy that can be used to inform research to address health disparities and improve the delivery of effective and responsive health-care services. [7][8][9] Regardless, there is limited consensus on how best to engage patients. 7 The overarching goal of the current study was to bring together YAABCS, health-care providers and stakeholders to identify recommendations to address research and practice gaps that impact YAABCS.…”

A taxonomy of impacts on clinical and translational research from community stakeholder engagement

“…Community stakeholder engagement, then, is multi-disciplinary and complex, yet it lends a lived-experience perspective so that health research itself better reflects what is most important to the population it studies and serves. 14 Lagging behind the growth of new stakeholder engagement approaches is the development of tools for evaluating, comparing and evolving those approaches, and there is an urgent need to develop these tools to demonstrate the impact of community stakeholder engagement in research. 11,15,16 Interactions between researchers and community stakeholders are not consistently captured in a standard or ordered framework, nor is the value of community stakeholders' activities to the research enterprise being measured.…”

“…Expanding the research process to include patients, caregivers, patient advocates or members of the general public involves bringing researchers together with those who are not primarily affiliated with academic research institutions. Community stakeholder engagement, then, is multi‐disciplinary and complex, yet it lends a lived‐experience perspective so that health research itself better reflects what is most important to the population it studies and serves …”

Exploring the perspectives of community members as research partners in rural and remote areas

“…Knowledge users may include, but are not limited to, research funders, health care providers, health system decision makers, advocacy organizations, patient groups, and/or members of the public [6,7]. Although they represent an important knowledge user group, community members (or the public) are less commonly engaged on research teams, and the evidence base for community-centered population health research is fragmented [8][9][10]. Understanding concepts and strategies for community member engagement in health research locally will help research teams operationalize engagement in a way that supports and accounts for the characteristics, needs, and preferences of particular groups of people to develop best practice guidelines.…”