Health> Vol.5 No.2A, February 2013

Patient involvement in lung foundation research: A seven year longitudinal case study

DownloadDownload as PDF (Size:112KB) Full-Text HTML PP. 320-330   DOI: 10.4236/health.2013.52A043

ABSTRACT

Patient involvement in health research is getting more accepted over the years. Until recently scientists and medical professionals were the sole assessors of quality and relevance of research proposals. In the Netherlands, as in other European and North American countries, emancipatory, political and democratic developments stimulated the emergence of patient involvement as a new “voice” in the appraisal of research. A time-series cross sectional longi-tudinal case study was used to describe and analyse a seven year period since the introduction of the patients’ perspective in the Long-fonds research cycle. Longfonds, the Lung Foundation in the Netherlands (LFN) was formerly called “Astma Fonds”. The study was conducted using an actors-interaction model against the background of the dynamics in society. The introduction of patient involvement resulted in a paradigm shift. The scientific and societal relevance of research proposals are now being reviewed by all parties in a more ef- fective and efficient way. Patients, now involved in the review procedure of research funding, are trained and equipped with an appraisal tool for societal relevance from a patients perspective. Scientific relevance and societal relevance are evaluated separately and balanced in the re- search funding application approval process. Societal relevance is being evaluated by a pa- tient advocates group. The results show how a government initiative and an approach by a patient organisation have led to more patient involvement in lung research. It requires “believers” both to initiate and continue the work and to promote the lessons learned inside and outside the patient organisation. As this depends on devoted individuals, the continuity of patient involvement remains vulnerable. This seven year study offers valuable insight in patient involvement against the background of the changeing health discourse.

KEYWORDS


Cite this paper

Teunissen, G. , Visse, M. , Laan, D. , de Boer, W. , Rutgers, M. and Abma, T. (2013) Patient involvement in lung foundation research: A seven year longitudinal case study. Health, 5, 320-330. doi: 10.4236/health.2013.52A043.

References

[1] WHO (2011) World report on disability, WHO/NMH/ 11.01, Geneva.
[2] Astma Fonds (2012) Handleiding vooraanmeling onderzoek. Astmafonds 2012.
[3] Yin, R.K., Green, J.L., Camilli, G. and Elmore, P.B. (2006) Handbook of complementary methods in education research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, xxix, 863 Pages.
[4] Yin, R.K. (1994) Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks.
[5] Eisenhardt, K.M. (1991) Better stories and better constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management Review, 16, 620-627.
[6] Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989) Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
[7] Kohn, L.T. (1997) Methods in case study analysis. The Center for Studying Health System Change. Technical Publication No. 2, June 1997 (Based on Panel Discussion Conducted at the 1996 Meeting of the Association for Health Services Research).
[8] Pettigrew, A.M. (1990) Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organization Science, 1, 267- 292. doi:10.1287/orsc.1.3.267
[9] Stein, T., Frankel, R.M. and Krupat, E. (2005) Enhancing clinician communication skills in a large healthcare organization: A longitudinal case study. Patient Education and Counseling, 58, 4-12. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2005.01.014
[10] Bowen, G.A. (2006) Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 Article 2.
[11] WMA—World Medical Association (2008) Declaration of helsinki. Seoul.
[12] Devers, K.J. (1999) How will we know “good” qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. Health Services Research, 34, 1153-1188.
[13] van Bijsterveldt, M. and Dekker, E. (2006) Handboek pati?ntenparticipatie in wetenschappelijk onderzoek. ZONMw. www.zonmw.nl/pati?ntenperspectief
[14] Ursum, J., Rijken, M., Heijmans, M., Cardol, M. and Schellevis, F. (2011) Zorg voor chronische zieken, organisatie van zorg, zelfmanagement, zelfredzaamheid en participatie. Nivel, Utrecht. http://www.nivel.nl/nieuws/overzichtstudie-zorg-voor-chronisch-zieken-eennieuwe-rol-voor-zorgverleners
[15] Teunissen, G.J., Visse, M.A., de Boer, W.I. and Abma, T.A. (2011) Patient issues in health research and quality of care: An inventory and data synthesis. Health Expectations. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00718.x
[16] Teunissen, G.J. and Abma, T.A. (2010) Derde partij tussen droom en daad. Tijdschrift voor Sociale Gezondheidszorg, 182-189.
[17] (2009) Involve 2009. P1: Getting involved in research grant applications, Guidelines for members of the public, NHS—National Institute for Health Research, and P2: Peer reviewing research proposals, Guidelines for members of the public. DH Department of Health. http://www.invo.org.uk
[18] Caron-Flinterman, J.F. (2005) A new voice in science: Patient participation in decision making on biomedical research. Thesis, VU-Free University, Amsterdam.
[19] Keizer B (2012) Exchanging knowledge on participation of health consumers and patients in research, quality and policy. April 2012, ZONMw: Den Haag
[20] Heijmans, M., Spreeuwenberg, P. and Rijken, M. (2010) Ontwikkelingen in de zorg voor chronisch zieken, rapportage 2010. NIVEL, Utrecht.
[21] Trappenburg, M.J. and van de Bovenkamp, H. (2008) Patient involvement in guideline development reconsidered. Health Care Analysis, 17, 198-216.
[22] Nierse, C. and Abma, T.A. (2011) Developing voice and empowerment: the first step towards a broad consultation in research agenda setting. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55, 411-421. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01388.x
[23] Visse, M.A., Teu-nissen, T., Peters, A., Widdershoven, G. and Abma, T.A. (2010) Dialogue for air, air for dialogue. Toward shared responsibilities in COPD practice. Health Care Analysis, 18, 358-373. doi:10.1007/s10728-009-0139-7
[24] Abma, T.A. and Broerse, J.E.W. (2010) Patient participa- tion as dialogue: Setting research agendas. Health Expectations, 13, 160-173. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00549.x
[25] Williamson, C. (2010) Towards the emancipation of patients: Patients’ experiences and the patient: Patients experiences and the patient movement. The Policy Press, University of Bristol, Bristol, 2010. Hobbs Southampton.
[26] Caron-Flinterman, J.F., Broerse, J.E.W., Teerling, J. and Bunders, J.F.G. (2005) Patients’ priorities concerning health research: The case of asthma and COPD research in the Netherlands. Health Expectations, 8, 253-263. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2005.00337.x
[27] Elberse J, Laan D, de Cock Buning T, Teunissen T, Broerse, J. and de Boer, W. (2012) Patient involvement in agenda setting for respiratory research in the Netherlands. European Respiratory Journal, 40, 508-510. doi:10.1183/09031936.00018812
[28] Bovenkamp, H., Grit, K. and Bal, R. (2008) Inventarisatie pati?ntenparticipatie in onderzoek, kwaliteit en beleid. Rotterdam: iBMG/EUR Erasmus MC.
[29] Boote, J. (2009) Critical perspectives on ‘consumer involvement’ in health research: Epistemological dissonance and the know-do gap. Journal of Sociology.
[30] Thompson, J., Bissell, P., Cooper, C., Armitage, C.J. and Barber, R. (2012) Credibility and the ‘professionalized’ lay expert: Reflections on the dilemmas and opportunities of public involvement in health research. Health (London), 16, 602-608. doi:10.1177/1363459312441008
[31] Barnes, M. and Cotterell, P. (2012) Critical perspectives on user involvement. The Policy Press, University of Bristol, Bristol.
[32] Spaapen, J., Dijstelbloem, H. and Wamelink, F. (2007) Evaluating research in context, a method for comprehensive assessment. The Haque NOW.
[33] GR/RVZ Gezondheidsraad/Raad voor volksgezondheid en zorg (2012) Toekomstverkenning ethiek en gezondheid. Signalering Ethiek en Gezondheid. Centrum voor Ethiek en Gezondheid, Den Haag.
[34] Abma, T.A., Nierse, C.J. and Widdershoven, C.A.M. (2009) Patients as partners in responsive research: Methodological notions for collaborations in mixed research teams. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 401-415. doi:10.1177/1049732309331869
[35] Denis, A. and Teller, M. (2011) Hefbomen voor beter patienten particpatie Nieuwe praktijken en mogelijkheden voor erkenning en financiering. Boudewijn stichting, Brussel.
[36] U-Biopred, PRO active projects patient criteria list link. http://www.ubiopred.european-lung-foundation.org/17872-patient-perspective-in-research-booklet.htm
[37] PGO patient criteria list link. http://www.pgosupport.nl/mailings/FILES/plugin_content/194/Criteria-waaier7.0.pdf

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.