Community participation

社区参与
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在英国,痴呆症的患病率越来越高,这给医疗保健带来了巨大的挑战。预计到2025年,受影响的个人将超过100万人,每年花费NHS63亿英镑。痴呆症患者住院很常见,占据约25%的英国医院病床,导致住院时间延长和健康状况下降。
    方法:本文介绍了开场阶段,这是一个更大的项目的一部分,患者和公众参与和参与(PPIE)被用来理解和导航对痴呆症患者的医院护理意味着什么。了解医院对痴呆症患者的护理,从2023年2月至7月,通过埃塞克斯和萨福克的痴呆症咖啡馆进行了焦点小组参与患者,照顾者和家庭成员。
    结果:使用了公认的PPIE报告和主题分析流程,并确定了有关医院护理的六个主题和21个子主题:个性化护理,照顾者的角色,基本护理,人际交往,信息共享和人员配备。
    结论:PPIE的结果将用于在项目的下一阶段通知利益相关者并与之合作,这包括检查医院的护理过程,确定接触点并评估这些区域。该项目继续得到包括痴呆症患者在内的利益相关者的信息,照顾者和工作人员。此外,结果可能会通知其他服务提供者加强护理,流程和交付。
    结论:展望未来,该研究强调了与痴呆症护理相关利益相关者建立合作关系的重要性.此外,它为重点领域提供了见解,这些领域对于急性护理组织在向痴呆症患者提供护理时至关重要。通过纳入PPIE的见解,该项目旨在确定痴呆症护理服务中的不平等,改善痴呆症患者的医院护理,培养更具包容性和支持性的医疗保健环境。
    这项研究的目的是探索有关痴呆症患者的医院护理的最重要问题,他们的照顾者和家人。痴呆症患者,护理人员和家庭成员通过社区痴呆症咖啡馆参与了这项研究,并被招募参加焦点小组讨论痴呆症患者的医院护理.讨论的问题和材料的设计是通过与大学部门的服务用户负责人和痴呆症专家协商制定的,并由患有痴呆症的服务用户成员进行审查。与一组护理人员进行了试点焦点小组。我们与痴呆症咖啡馆经理合作,协调招聘和合适的环境来管理焦点小组。
    背景:不适用。
    BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of dementia in the United Kingdom presents significant challenges for healthcare, with projections estimating over a million affected individuals by 2025, costing the NHS £6.3 billion annually. Hospital admissions among dementia patients are common, occupying about 25% of UK hospital beds and leading to prolonged stays and diminished health outcomes.
    METHODS: This paper presents the opening stages, part of a larger project where Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) was employed to understand and navigate what it means for hospital care for a person living with dementia. To understand hospital care for dementia patients, focus groups were conducted through dementia cafés in Essex and Suffolk from February to July 2023 engaging patients, carers and family members.
    RESULTS: Recognised processes for reporting PPIE and thematic analysis were used and identified six themes and 21 subthemes regarding hospital care: individualised care, role of carers, basic care, interpersonal communication, information sharing and staffing.
    CONCLUSIONS: The results from the PPIE will be used to inform and work with stakeholders through the next phases of the project, which involves examining care processes in the hospital, identifying touchpoints and evaluating these areas. The project continues to be informed by stakeholders including people living with dementia, carers and staff. Additionally, the results may inform other service providers for care enhancements, processes and delivery.
    CONCLUSIONS: Moving forward, the study emphasises the importance of building collaborative relationships with stakeholders involved in dementia care. Additionally, it provides insights to focus areas that are fundamental for acute care organisations when delivering care to people living with dementia. By incorporating insights from PPIE, this project seeks to identify inequalities in dementia care services, improve hospital care for people living with dementia, fostering a more inclusive and supportive healthcare environment.
    UNASSIGNED: The purpose of the study was to explore the most important issues around hospital care for people with dementia, their carers and families. Persons living with dementia, carers and family members were involved in the study through community dementia cafés and recruited to take part in focus groups to discuss hospital care for patients with dementia. The design of questions and materials for the discussions was developed through consultation with the university department\'s service user lead and dementia specialist and reviewed by a service user member living with dementia. A pilot focus group was conducted with a group of carers. We worked with the dementia café managers to coordinate recruitment and a suitable environment to run the focus groups.
    BACKGROUND: Not applicable.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    社区咨询委员会(CAB)在开发和提供以患者为中心的护理方面发挥着重要作用。然而,参与对CAB成员的影响还没有得到很好的研究,特别是在全球范围内。2022年,乙型肝炎基金会(HBF)召集了第一个全球乙型肝炎和丁型肝炎CAB,来自17个国家的23名成员,代表世界卫生组织(世卫组织)七个区域中的六个,以及乙型肝炎和丁型肝炎疾病负担最大的国家。
    为了反思组建有效且有动力的CAB的过程,并评估对CAB参与者的影响,2023年7月和8月举行了三次虚拟焦点小组会议,16人参加。会议被记录和转录。问题集中在加入CAB的动机上,会员体验,和吸取的教训。扎根理论分析被用来产生关于CAB成员参与原因的假设,以及挑战和建议。使用归纳推理的定性分析确定了响应中的关键主题。转录本由主要和次要编码器独立分析。
    加入CAB的动机包括参与者渴望倡导乙型肝炎和丁型肝炎患者,和其他利他因素。与会者反映,通过CAB成员资格,他们获得了网络和宣传机会,并增强了与乙型肝炎和丁型肝炎相关的知识。参与者经历的挑战与时间有关,物理限制,和耻辱。最后,参与者讨论了他们与药物开发商的有限直接接触,并提出了CAB可以增加与未来利益相关者互动的方式。
    根据参与者的评估,建立一个全球CAB的污名化传染病是值得的努力。定期对社区咨询委员会的结构和绩效进行内部审查对于确保CAB履行其使命至关重要。
    UNASSIGNED: Community Advisory Boards (CABs) play an important role in developing and delivering patient-centered care. However, the impact of participation on CAB members has not been well studied, particularly on the global scale. In 2022, the Hepatitis B Foundation (HBF) convened the first global hepatitis B and hepatitis delta CAB with 23 members from 17 countries, representing six out of the seven World Health Organization (WHO) regions, and countries with the largest hepatitis B and hepatitis delta disease burden.
    UNASSIGNED: To reflect on the process of assembling an effective and motivated CAB and assess the impact on CAB participants, three virtual focus group sessions were held with 16 participants in July and August 2023. Sessions were recorded and transcribed. Questions focused on motivations for joining the CAB, membership experiences, and lessons learned. Grounded theory analysis was used to generate hypotheses about reasons for CAB members\' participation, as well as challenges and suggestions. Qualitative analysis using inductive reasoning identified key themes within responses. Transcripts were independently analyzed by a primary and secondary coder.
    UNASSIGNED: Motivations for joining the CAB included participants\' desire to advocate for people living with hepatitis B and hepatitis delta, and other altruistic factors. Participants reflected that through CAB membership, they gained networking and advocacy opportunities and enhanced their hepatitis B- and hepatitis delta-related knowledge. Challenges participants experienced were related to time, physical limitations, and stigma. Finally, participants discussed their limited direct engagement with drug developers and proposed ways the CAB can increase interactions with stakeholders going forward.
    UNASSIGNED: Based on participants\' assessments, establishing a global CAB for stigmatized infectious diseases is worth the effort. Regular internal review of community advisory boards\' structure and performance is critical to ensure the CAB is fulfilling its mission.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:社区参与被认为与患有严重精神疾病(PSMI)的人的康复经验和生活质量呈正相关。然而,潜在机制尚不清楚.这项研究考察了自我污名对PSMI中社区参与与个人恢复经验和生活质量之间关系的中介作用。
    方法:基于北京315个PSMI的社区样本进行结构方程建模和中介分析,中国,使用社区参与域度量进行调查的人,精神疾病的内化污名,恢复评估量表,生活质量量表,和人口统计问卷。大多数人都在中年。大约一半的人结婚了,一半是女性。大多数参与者获得了残疾证明。
    结果:结果表明,社区参与与PSMI的个人恢复直接相关(P<0.01),并通过自我污名的介导与个人恢复间接相关(P<0.01)。此外,社区参与对PSMI的生活质量没有直接影响,但通过自我污名的调解表现出间接影响(P<0.01)。研究结果表明,自我污名在社区参与与对康复和生活质量的主观感知之间的关系中起到了中介作用。
    结论:研究结果表明,社区参与PSMI应该得到加强。应实施量身定制的个人干预服务,以通过积极参与活动来提高积极的自我意识并减少自我污名。这种参与有可能改善康复的主观体验和整体生活质量。
    OBJECTIVE: Community participation is believed to be positively associated with recovery experiences and quality of life for people with serious mental illnesses (PSMIs). However, the underlying mechanism remains unclear. This study examined the mediating effect of self-stigma on the relationship between community participation and personal recovery experiences and quality of life among PSMIs.
    METHODS: Structural equation modeling and mediation analyses were conducted based on a community sample of 315 PSMIs in Beijing, China, who were surveyed using the Community Participation Domains Measure, Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness, Recovery Assessment Scale, Quality of Life Scale, and a demographic questionnaire. Most were in their middle age. About half were married, and half were females. Most participants got disability certificates.
    RESULTS: The results indicate that community participation is directly associated with personal recovery of PSMIs (P < 0.01) and indirectly associated with personal recovery through the mediation of self-stigma (P < 0.01). Additionally, community participation does not have a direct effect on the quality of life of PSMIs but shows an indirect effect through the mediation of self-stigma (P < 0.01). The findings suggest that self-stigma mediates the relationship between community participation and both the subjective perception of recovery and quality of life.
    CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that community participation for PSMIs should be enhanced. Tailored individual intervention services should be implemented to boost positive self-awareness and reduce self-stigma through active engagement in activities. Such participation has the potential to improve subjective experiences of recovery and overall quality of life.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    有效的社区进入过程会影响社区对公共卫生干预措施的参与和接受。尽管关于社区伙伴关系重要性的文献越来越多,缺乏关于社区进入过程中涉及的经验的务实和实用的文件,因为它涉及文化敏感的主题,例如童婚,这可以帮助支持在这一领域工作的研究人员。本文重点介绍了与社区知识相关的关键主题,有效沟通,文化敏感性,共同制作和提供反馈,这有助于在社区成员和研究团队之间建立信任。机构代表,不管理期望,缺乏清晰度,连同社区看门人的个人意见,可以为培养与社区的可信赖关系创造挑战。在研究团队和社区利益相关者之间的过程开始时,必须积极解决这些现实。研究人员可以建立信任,通过与当地团体和领导人合作,建立联系并参与不同的社区,使用文化上适当的方法,解决社区问题。与尼日利亚和其他国家的童婚社区合作的未来项目将受益于本文提出的思考。
    Effective community entry processes influence community participation and acceptance of public health interventions. Though there is a growing body of literature on the importance of community partnerships, there is a lack of pragmatic and practical documentation of the experiences involved in the community entry process as it relates to culturally sensitive topics such as child marriage which can help to support researchers working in this field. This article highlights key themes related to knowledge of the community, effective communication, cultural sensitivity, coproduction and giving feedback which help to build trust between the community members and the research team. Institutional representation, not managing expectations, and lack of clarity, along with personal opinions of community gatekeepers can create challenges for the fostering of trustworthy relationships with the community. These realities must be actively addressed right at the onset of the process between the research team and community stakeholders. Researchers can develop trust, form connections and engage different communities by working with local groups and leaders, using culturally appropriate methods, and addressing community concerns. Future projects working with communities on child marriage in Nigeria and other countries would benefit from the reflections presented in this paper.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:学习卫生保健社区(LHCC)是通过卫生保健系统和社区之间的相互问责来加强卫生保健的框架。LHCC组件包括用于健康相关数据捕获的基础设施,护理改善目标,有利的政策环境,和社区参与。LHCC涉及医疗保健提供者,研究人员,决策者,以及社区成员,他们致力于确定医疗保健需求,并通过基于证据的解决方案来解决这些需求。这项研究的目的是总结在农村地区建立LHCC的障碍和推动者。
    方法:通过检索电子数据库进行系统评价。资格标准由研究小组确定。系统地收集和整理了有关农村地区LHCC的已发表文献。筛选由两名作者独立完成。关于农村医疗保健的详细信息,活动,提取了在农村地区建设LHCC的障碍和促成因素。定性分析用于确定核心主题。
    结果:在8169篇确定的文章中,25人是合格的。LHCC旨在加强社区成员和医疗保健提供者之间的合作和共同学习,将社区反馈整合到医疗保健服务中,并分享信息。主要障碍包括获得足够的资金和招募参与者。促进者包括利益相关者的有意义的参与和利益相关者的合作。
    结论:LHCC建立在有意义地使用健康数据的基础上,并使医疗保健从业人员和社区成员能够做出明智的决策。通过缩小知识生成与应用于实践之间的差距,LHCC有可能改变农村地区的医疗保健服务。
    BACKGROUND: A Learning Health Care Community (LHCC) is a framework to enhance health care through mutual accountability between the health care system and the community. LHCC components include infrastructure for health-related data capture, care improvement targets, a supportive policy environment, and community engagement. The LHCC involves health care providers, researchers, decision-makers, and community members who work to identify health care needs and address them with evidence-based solutions. The objective of this study was to summarize the barriers and enablers to building an LHCC in rural areas.
    METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching electronic databases. Eligibility criteria was determined by the research team. Published literature on LHCCs in rural areas was systematically collected and organized. Screening was completed independently by two authors. Detailed information about rural health care, activities, and barriers and enablers to building an LHCC in rural areas was extracted. Qualitative analysis was used to identify core themes.
    RESULTS: Among 8169 identified articles, 25 were eligible. LHCCs aimed to increase collaboration and co-learning between community members and health care providers, integrate community feedback in health care services, and to share information. Main barriers included obtaining adequate funding and participant recruitment. Enablers included meaningful engagement of stakeholders and stakeholder collaboration.
    CONCLUSIONS: The LHCC is built on a foundation of meaningful use of health data and empowers health care practitioners and community members in informed decision-making. By reducing the gap between knowledge generation and its application to practice, the LHCC has the potential to transform health care delivery in rural areas.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    公民科学可以成为促进健康技术创新成功实施的有力方法,关心或幸福。让经验专家作为技术创新的共同研究人员或共同设计师,促进了相互学习,社区建设,和赋权。通过利用预期用户的专业知识,创新有更好的机会被采纳并解决复杂的健康相关问题。由于公民科学仍然是健康和福祉的相对较新的实践,对成功合作的有效方法和准则知之甚少。本范围审查旨在提供以下方面的见解:(1)公民参与当前健康技术创新研究的水平,关心或幸福,(2)使用的参与式方法,(3)研究人员学到的教训。根据PRISMA-ScR指南进行了范围审查并进行了报告。该搜索于2021年1月在SCOPUS中进行,包括2016年至2020年之间发表的同行评审期刊和会议论文。最终选择(N=83)仅限于明确关注健康技术创新的实证研究,关心或福祉,并参与公民在合作或更高的水平。我们的研究结果表明,人们对公民科学作为一种包容性研究方法的兴趣与日俱增。公民主要参与创新的设计阶段,较少参与准备工作,数据分析或报告阶段。在其中一个研究阶段,有八个记录使公民处于领先地位。研究人员使用不同的术语来描述他们的方法论方法,包括参与式设计,共同设计,基于社区的参与式研究,共同创造,公众和患者的参与,参与行动研究,以用户为中心的设计和公民科学。我们选择的案例表明,成功的公民科学项目与合作者建立了结构和纵向的伙伴关系,使用定位和自适应的研究方法,并拥有愿意放弃传统权力动力并参与相互学习的研究人员。
    Citizen science can be a powerful approach to foster the successful implementation of technological innovations in health, care or well-being. Involving experience experts as co-researchers or co-designers of technological innovations facilitates mutual learning, community building, and empowerment. By utilizing the expert knowledge of the intended users, innovations have a better chance to get adopted and solve complex health-related problems. As citizen science is still a relatively new practice for health and well-being, little is known about effective methods and guidelines for successful collaboration. This scoping review aims to provide insight in (1) the levels of citizen involvement in current research on technological innovations for health, care or well-being, (2) the used participatory methodologies, and (3) lesson\'s learned by the researchers.A scoping review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search was performed in SCOPUS in January 2021 and included peer-reviewed journal and conference papers published between 2016 and 2020. The final selection (N = 83) was limited to empirical studies that had a clear focus on technological innovations for health, care or well-being and involved citizens at the level of collaboration or higher. Our results show a growing interest in citizens science as an inclusive research approach. Citizens are predominantly involved in the design phase of innovations and less in the preparation, data-analyses or reporting phase. Eight records had citizens in the lead in one of the research phases.Researcher use different terms to describe their methodological approach including participatory design, co-design, community based participatory research, co-creation, public and patient involvement, partcipatory action research, user-centred design and citizen science. Our selection of cases shows that succesful citizen science projects develop a structural and longitudinal partnership with their collaborators, use a situated and adaptive research approach, and have researchers that are willing to abandon traditional power dynamics and engage in a mutual learning experience.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:现在,负责患者和公众参与(PPI)的特定职责的工人通常是英国应用健康研究组织格局的一部分。尽管国家卫生与护理研究所(NIHR)在为英国公共资助的卫生研究开发强大的PPI基础设施方面发挥了先锋作用,在研究的设计和交付中嵌入实质性和可持续的公众投入仍然存在相当大的障碍。值得注意的是,研究人员和临床医生报告说,资助者对可交付成果的取向与将公众参与纳入研究所需的资源和劳动力之间存在紧张关系。这些和其他紧张局势需要进一步调查。
    方法:这是一项具有参与因素的定性研究。使用目的性和滚雪球抽样,并关注区域和机构多样性,我们在英格兰各地对持有NIHR资助的正式PPI职位的个人进行了21次半结构化访谈.通过反身性主题分析对访谈进行了分析,并通过两次与研究参与者的研讨会提出并调整了编码和框架。
    结果:我们提出了五个总体主题,这些主题表明人们对PPI角色的期望与这些角色的结构限制之间越来越紧张:(i)支持的不稳定性;(ii)无形劳动力的生产;(iii)PPI不仅仅是工作;(iv)无控制的问责制;(v)在不改变的情况下进行更改。
    结论:NIHRPPI劳动力在研究活动中嵌入患者和公众投入方面取得了相当大的进展。然而,这一角色并没有解决绩效管理优先事项和PPI劳动之间的紧张关系,而是它的流离失所和潜在的加剧。我们建议,“交付”PPI的期望取决于矛盾的需求,即提供从根本上脱离任何转型劳动的转型干预措施。我们得出的结论是,为改变健康研究生态以更好地响应患者需求而进行的持续努力将需要努力应对这种矛盾需求的力量和后果。
    BACKGROUND: Workers tasked with specific responsibilities around patient and public involvement (PPI) are now routinely part of the organizational landscape for applied health research in the United Kingdom. Even as the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) has had a pioneering role in developing a robust PPI infrastructure for publicly funded health research in the United Kingdom, considerable barriers remain to embedding substantive and sustainable public input in the design and delivery of research. Notably, researchers and clinicians report a tension between funders\' orientation towards deliverables and the resources and labour required to embed public involvement in research. These and other tensions require further investigation.
    METHODS: This was a qualitative study with participatory elements. Using purposive and snowball sampling and attending to regional and institutional diversity, we conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with individuals holding NIHR-funded formal PPI roles across England. Interviews were analysed through reflexive thematic analysis with coding and framing presented and adjusted through two workshops with study participants.
    RESULTS: We generated five overarching themes which signal a growing tension between expectations put on staff in PPI roles and the structural limitations of these roles: (i) the instability of support; (ii) the production of invisible labour; (iii) PPI work as more than a job; (iv) accountability without control; and (v) delivering change without changing.
    CONCLUSIONS: The NIHR PPI workforce has enabled considerable progress in embedding patient and public input in research activities. However, the role has led not to a resolution of the tension between performance management priorities and the labour of PPI, but rather to its displacement and - potentially - its intensification. We suggest that the expectation to \"deliver\" PPI hinges on a paradoxical demand to deliver a transformational intervention that is fundamentally divorced from any labour of transformation. We conclude that ongoing efforts to transform health research ecologies so as to better respond to the needs of patients will need to grapple with the force and consequences of this paradoxical demand.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号