IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v11y2018i4d10.1007_s40271-018-0298-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs): Identifying Challenges and Solutions to Support Engagement in Research

Author

Listed:
  • James D. Harrison

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Wendy G. Anderson

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Maureen Fagan

    (Center for Patients and Families, Brigham and Women’s Hospital)

  • Edmondo Robinson

    (Christiana Care Health System)

  • Jeffrey Schnipper

    (Brigham and Women’s Hospital)

  • Gina Symczak

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Catherine Hanson

    (University of Michigan Local Patient and Stakeholder Council)

  • Martha B. Carnie

    (Center for Patients and Families, Brigham and Women’s Hospital)

  • Jim Banta

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Sherry Chen

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Jonathan Duong

    (University of California San Francisco)

  • Celene Wong

    (Center for Patients and Families, Brigham and Women’s Hospital)

  • Andrew D. Auerbach

    (University of California San Francisco)

Abstract

Objective The aim was to describe barriers to patient and family advisory council (PFAC) member engagement in research and strategies to support engagement in this context. Methods We formed a study team comprising patient advisors, researchers, physicians, and nurses. We then undertook a qualitative study using focus groups and interviews. We invited PFAC members, PFAC leaders, hospital leaders, and researchers from nine academic medical centers that are part of a hospital medicine research network to participate. All participants were asked a standard set of questions exploring the study question. We used content analysis to analyze data. Results Eighty PFAC members and other stakeholders (45 patient/caregiver members of PFACs, 12 PFAC leaders, 12 hospital leaders, 11 researchers) participated in eight focus and 19 individual interviews. We identified ten barriers to PFAC member engagement in research. Codes were organized into three categories: (1) individual PFAC member reluctance; (2) lack of skills and training; and (3) problems connecting with the right person at the right time. We identified ten strategies to support engagement. These were organized into four categories: (1) creating an environment where the PFAC members are making a genuine and unique contribution; (2) building community between PFAC members and researchers; (3) best practice activities for researchers to facilitate engagement; and (4) tools and training. Conclusion Barriers to engaging PFAC members in research include patients’ negative perceptions of research and researchers’ lack of training. Building community between PFAC members and researchers is a foundation for partnerships. There are shared training opportunities for PFAC members and researchers to build skills about research and research engagement.

Suggested Citation

  • James D. Harrison & Wendy G. Anderson & Maureen Fagan & Edmondo Robinson & Jeffrey Schnipper & Gina Symczak & Catherine Hanson & Martha B. Carnie & Jim Banta & Sherry Chen & Jonathan Duong & Celene Wo, 2018. "Patient and Family Advisory Councils (PFACs): Identifying Challenges and Solutions to Support Engagement in Research," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(4), pages 413-423, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-018-0298-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0298-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-018-0298-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-018-0298-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-018-0298-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.