Literature DB >> 21029279

Service user involvement in cancer care: the impact on service users.

Phil Cotterell1, Gwen Harlow, Carolyn Morris, Peter Beresford, Bec Hanley, Anita Sargeant, John Sitzia, Kristina Staley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Service user involvement is embedded in the United Kingdom's National Health Service, but knowledge about the impact of involvement on service users, such as the benefits and challenges of involvement, is scant. Our research addresses this gap.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the personal impact of involvement on the lives of service users affected by cancer.
DESIGN: We conducted eight focus groups with user groups supplemented by nine face-to-face interviews with involved individuals active at a local, regional and national level. Thematic analysis was conducted both independently and collectively. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-four participants, engaged in involvement activities in cancer services, palliative care and research, were recruited across Great Britain.
RESULTS: We identified three main themes: (i) 'Expectations and motivations for involvement'- the desire to improve services and the need for user groups to have a clear purpose, (ii) 'Positive aspects of involvement'- support provided by user groups and assistance to live well with cancer and (iii) 'Challenging aspects of involvement'- insensitivities and undervaluing of involvement by staff.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified that involvement has the capacity to produce varied and significant personal impacts for involved people. Involvement can be planned and implemented in ways that increase these impacts and that mediates challenges for those involved. Key aspects to increase positive impact for service users include the value service providers attach to involvement activities, the centrality with which involvement is embedded in providers' activities, and the capacity of involvement to influence policy, planning, service delivery, research and/or practice.
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21029279      PMCID: PMC5060569          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00627.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  17 in total

Review 1.  Public involvement in breast cancer research: an analysis and model for future research.

Authors:  Sabrina McCormick; Julia Brody; Phil Brown; Ruth Polk
Journal:  Int J Health Serv       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 1.663

2.  Funding community-based participatory research: lessons learned.

Authors:  Marj Plumb; Walter Price; Marion H E Kavanaugh-Lynch
Journal:  J Interprof Care       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.338

3.  Best research for best health: a new national health research strategy.

Authors:  Timothy W Evans
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2006 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.659

4.  Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement: the need for an evidence base.

Authors:  Sophie Staniszewska; Sandy Herron-Marx; Carole Mockford
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2008-10-03       Impact factor: 2.038

5.  From rhetoric to reality: including patient voices in supportive cancer care planning.

Authors:  Sara K Tedford Gold; Julia Abelson; Cathy A Charles
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  'Working the system'. Achieving change through partnership working: an evaluation of cancer partnership groups.

Authors:  Alison Richardson; John Sitzia; Phil Cotterell
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Patient perspectives on involvement in cancer research in the UK.

Authors:  Hazel Thornton
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.520

Review 8.  Quality improvement report: Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. Commentary: presenting unbiased information to patients can be difficult.

Authors:  Jenny Donovan; Nicola Mills; Monica Smith; Lucy Brindle; Ann Jacoby; Tim Peters; Stephen Frankel; David Neal; Freddie Hamdy
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-10-05

9.  Patient and clinician collaboration in the design of a national randomized breast cancer trial.

Authors:  Jo Marsden; Jane Bradburn
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Symptom burden in cancer survivorship.

Authors:  V Shannon Burkett; Charles S Cleeland
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.062

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  Living in dressings and bandages: findings from workshops with people with Epidermolysis bullosa.

Authors:  Patricia Grocott; Rebecca Blackwell; Heather Weir; Elizabeth Pillay
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Philosophy, health services and research.

Authors:  Jonathan Q Tritter
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Patient and public involvement in urogynecology: a pause for reflection before taking a leap.

Authors:  Sharif Ismail; Diaa E E Rizk
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  'Calling executives and clinicians to account': user involvement in commissioning cancer services.

Authors:  David H Evans; Roger J Bacon; Elizabeth Greer; Angela M Stagg; Pat Turton
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Is self-management feasible and acceptable for addressing nutrition and physical activity needs of cancer survivors?

Authors:  Sharon Lawn; Stephanie Zrim; Stephanie Leggett; Michelle Miller; Richard Woodman; Lynnette Jones; Ganessan Kichenadasse; Shawgi Sukumaran; Chris Karapetis; Bogda Koczwara
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-12-28       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Aiming for inclusion: a case study of motivations for involvement in mental health-care governance by ethnic minority users.

Authors:  Cláudia de Freitas
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Exploring the impact of patient and public involvement in a cancer research setting.

Authors:  Jill Thompson; Paul Bissell; Cindy L Cooper; Chris J Armitage; Rosemary Barber
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2013-11-25

8.  Is the patient satisfaction questionnaire an acceptable tool for use in a hospice inpatient setting? A pilot study.

Authors:  Kate Me Henriksen; Naomi Heller; Anne M Finucane; David Oxenham
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 3.234

Review 9.  The role of the public in developing interventions: a reflection and critique of a cancer clinical trials unit's model.

Authors:  Jim Fitzgibbon; Jessica Baillie; Natalie Simon; Annmarie Nelson
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 2.711

10.  Results of a transparent expert consultation on patient and public involvement in palliative care research.

Authors:  Barbara A Daveson; Susanne de Wolf-Linder; Jana Witt; Kirstie Newson; Carolyn Morris; Irene J Higginson; Catherine J Evans
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 4.762

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.