Literature DB >> 32537915

Patient involvement in surgical wound care research: A scoping review.

Rachel Muir1,2, Joan Julie Carlini3,4, Emma Louise Harbeck1, Brigid Mary Gillespie1,5,6, Haitham Wadah Tuffaha6,7, Rachel Michell Walker1,7, Elizabeth Catherine McInnes8,9,10, Sharon Leanne Latimer1,5,6, Frances Fengzhi Lin6,11, Josh Michael Pearcy1, Wendy Pearl Chaboyer1,6.   

Abstract

Active involvement of patients in planning, conducting, and disseminating research has been adopted by many organisations internationally, but the extent to which this occurs in surgical wound care is not evident. This scoping review aimed to identify how patients have been involved in surgical wound care research and the quality of its reporting. Full-text studies focused on preoperative and postoperative surgical wound care in the acute care setting, published in English between 2004 and 2019, were included in the review. Screening, data charting, and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently, adjudicated by a third, and then reviewed by five others. Thematic analysis synthesised the findings. Of the eight included studies, seven explained the methods for patient involvement and five described aims related to patient involvement and commented on patient involvement in the discussion. None met all of the quality assessment criteria. Three themes emerged: involvement in modifying and refining research processes, connecting and balancing expert and patient views, and sharing personal insights. Recommendations to improve patient involvement in surgical wounds research include the following: using framework and tools to inform future research; training researcher and patients in their respective research roles; and ongoing monitoring of patient involvement.
© 2020 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  consumer involvement; patient participation; research; surgical wounds; systematic review

Year:  2020        PMID: 32537915      PMCID: PMC7948725          DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13395

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Wound J        ISSN: 1742-4801            Impact factor:   3.315


  36 in total

Review 1.  Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.

Authors:  Mojtaba Vaismoradi; Hannele Turunen; Terese Bondas
Journal:  Nurs Health Sci       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 1.857

2.  Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting.

Authors:  Heather L Colquhoun; Danielle Levac; Kelly K O'Brien; Sharon Straus; Andrea C Tricco; Laure Perrier; Monika Kastner; David Moher
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  The Evolving Methodology of Scoping Reviews.

Authors:  Pamela Z Cacchione
Journal:  Clin Nurs Res       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 2.075

Review 4.  The antecedents, forms and consequences of patient involvement: A narrative review of the literature.

Authors:  Hannah Snyder; Jon Engström
Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 5.837

5.  Patient involvement in surgical wound care research: A scoping review.

Authors:  Rachel Muir; Joan Julie Carlini; Emma Louise Harbeck; Brigid Mary Gillespie; Haitham Wadah Tuffaha; Rachel Michell Walker; Elizabeth Catherine McInnes; Sharon Leanne Latimer; Frances Fengzhi Lin; Josh Michael Pearcy; Wendy Pearl Chaboyer
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-06-14       Impact factor: 3.315

6.  Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis; Sander Greenland; Mark A Hlatky; Muin J Khoury; Malcolm R Macleod; David Moher; Kenneth F Schulz; Robert Tibshirani
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  Dean Fergusson; Zarah Monfaredi; Kusala Pussegoda; Chantelle Garritty; Anne Lyddiatt; Beverley Shea; Lisa Duffett; Mona Ghannad; Joshua Montroy; M. Hassan Murad; Misty Pratt; Tamara Rader; Risa Shorr; Fatemeh Yazdi
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2018-05-22

8.  Inter-rater and test-retest reliability of quality assessments by novice student raters using the Jadad and Newcastle-Ottawa Scales.

Authors:  Mark Oremus; Carolina Oremus; Geoffrey B C Hall; Margaret C McKinnon
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research.

Authors:  S Staniszewska; J Brett; I Simera; K Seers; C Mockford; S Goodlad; D G Altman; D Moher; R Barber; S Denegri; A Entwistle; P Littlejohns; C Morris; R Suleman; V Thomas; C Tysall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-08-02

10.  Reaching consensus on reporting patient and public involvement (PPI) in research: methods and lessons learned from the development of reporting guidelines.

Authors:  Jo Brett; Sophie Staniszewska; Iveta Simera; Kate Seers; Carole Mockford; Susan Goodlad; Doug Altman; David Moher; Rosemary Barber; Simon Denegri; Andrew Robert Entwistle; Peter Littlejohns; Christopher Morris; Rashida Suleman; Victoria Thomas; Colin Tysall
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-22       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  2 in total

1.  How common is patient and public involvement (PPI)? Cross-sectional analysis of frequency of PPI reporting in health research papers and associations with methods, funding sources and other factors.

Authors:  Iain Lang; Angela King; Georgia Jenkins; Kate Boddy; Zohrah Khan; Kristin Liabo
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 3.006

2.  Patient involvement in surgical wound care research: A scoping review.

Authors:  Rachel Muir; Joan Julie Carlini; Emma Louise Harbeck; Brigid Mary Gillespie; Haitham Wadah Tuffaha; Rachel Michell Walker; Elizabeth Catherine McInnes; Sharon Leanne Latimer; Frances Fengzhi Lin; Josh Michael Pearcy; Wendy Pearl Chaboyer
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-06-14       Impact factor: 3.315

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.