Karen Schipper1, Tineke A Abma. 1. Department of Medical Humanities, EMGO+ Institute, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. k.schipper@vumc.nl
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The value of incorporating patients' perspectives in health care is being acknowledged more and more because such incorporation may improve quality of health care. However, research priorities are mostly driven by professionals. In this study, renal patients were engaged to list priorities for social scientific research in order to complement the professionals' research agenda on kidney diseases. METHODS: A qualitative methodology was conducted by a team consisting of researchers and renal patients. Individual and group interviews were held in order to develop a social scientific research agenda from the perspective of patients on dialysis or with a history of dialysis. Subsequently, some current medical literature was scanned to explore whether or not the top priorities in this social science agenda were indeed under investigation by scientists in the field of health research. RESULTS: Respondents prioritized 17 research themes. Three top priorities included research on coping, family life and mastery in the face of demanding treatment. As patients have to adapt themselves permanently to the unpredictability of their disease and different stressors, research on coping receives high priority. The patients' illness affects the family as well and patients therefore indicate that research should focus on their relatives and the family as a social system. Patients often feel their lives are run by the requirements of the medical system. Strategies that help patients to remain independent and keep control over their own life are therefore considered as highly important research topics. CONCLUSIONS: Renal patients' social scientific research agenda can be used together with biomedical research agendas, in order to match research with the context and needs of patients. Social scientific research topics should be studied from a holistic perspective as having a disease and living a life are interrelated. This requires intense collaboration between biomedical and social scientific researchers.
BACKGROUND: The value of incorporating patients' perspectives in health care is being acknowledged more and more because such incorporation may improve quality of health care. However, research priorities are mostly driven by professionals. In this study, renal patients were engaged to list priorities for social scientific research in order to complement the professionals' research agenda on kidney diseases. METHODS: A qualitative methodology was conducted by a team consisting of researchers and renal patients. Individual and group interviews were held in order to develop a social scientific research agenda from the perspective of patients on dialysis or with a history of dialysis. Subsequently, some current medical literature was scanned to explore whether or not the top priorities in this social science agenda were indeed under investigation by scientists in the field of health research. RESULTS: Respondents prioritized 17 research themes. Three top priorities included research on coping, family life and mastery in the face of demanding treatment. As patients have to adapt themselves permanently to the unpredictability of their disease and different stressors, research on coping receives high priority. The patients' illness affects the family as well and patients therefore indicate that research should focus on their relatives and the family as a social system. Patients often feel their lives are run by the requirements of the medical system. Strategies that help patients to remain independent and keep control over their own life are therefore considered as highly important research topics. CONCLUSIONS: Renal patients' social scientific research agenda can be used together with biomedical research agendas, in order to match research with the context and needs of patients. Social scientific research topics should be studied from a holistic perspective as having a disease and living a life are interrelated. This requires intense collaboration between biomedical and social scientific researchers.
Authors: Bénédicte Sautenet; Allison Tong; Karine E Manera; Jeremy R Chapman; Anthony N Warrens; David Rosenbloom; Germaine Wong; John Gill; Klemens Budde; Lionel Rostaing; Lorna Marson; Michelle A Josephson; Peter P Reese; Timothy L Pruett; Camilla S Hanson; Donal O'Donoghue; Helen Tam-Tham; Jean-Michel Halimi; Jenny I Shen; John Kanellis; John D Scandling; Kirsten Howard; Martin Howell; Nick Cross; Nicole Evangelidis; Philip Masson; Rainer Oberbauer; Samuel Fung; Shilpa Jesudason; Simon Knight; Sreedhar Mandayam; Stephen P McDonald; Steve Chadban; Tasleem Rajan; Jonathan C Craig Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Christine Horvat Davey; Allison R Webel; Ashwini R Sehgal; Joachim G Voss; Anne Huml Journal: Nephrol Nurs J Date: 2019 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 0.959
Authors: Tineke A Abma; Carina A C M Pittens; Merel Visse; Janneke E Elberse; Jacqueline E W Broerse Journal: Health Expect Date: 2014-05-30 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Braden Manns; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Erin Lillie; Sally Crowe P G Dip; Annette Cyr; Michael Gladish; Claire Large; Howard Silverman; Brenda Toth; Wim Wolfs; Andreas Laupacis Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 8.237