ABSTRACT
Qualitative methods are used to capture stakeholder perspectives within learning healthcare systems (LHS), but there is a need to specify methods that balance rigour and pragmatic approaches to inform quality improvement (QI). Utilizing examples from two QI projects within the OTNY LHS, we illustrate methods and strategies that build team capacity and flexibility to respond to an evolving LHS. Method(s): Qualitative methods were tailored to fit each project's timelines and goals, to inform both practice and research. Tools to facilitate rapid cycle feedback included interview/focus group summary templates, aggregate summaries that synthesize findings by stakeholder group, case matrix templates for rapid extraction and systematic categorization of data along topic areas, and dissemination materials adapted for stakeholder audience and project phases. Strategies to maintain rigour included processes for data reduction and interpretation, a multi-disciplinary approach for analysis, frequent consensus-based meetings, data triangulation, and member checks. Result(s): Rapid cycle approaches yielded interim results that reshaped research questions or identified critical gaps. Case summary analysis exploring the impact of COVID-19 revealed limited information on telehealth challenges amongst OTNY participants, necessitating a shift in recruitment and interview focus. For another project, analytic methods were sequenced to rapidly inventory suggestions from interview summaries on how to enhance OTNY practice to better address racism, while subsequent thematic analysis of transcripts captured participants' experiences of racism for context. Challenges included concurrent alignment of data collection and analysis, tailoring summary templates to maximize utility for rapid analysis, and maintaining flexibility to respond to evolving findings and LHS stakeholder input. Conclusion(s): The diverse methods and strategies illustrated by these projects offer guidance for balancing.
ABSTRACT
Co-creation places key stakeholders at the centre of development processes for quality improvement projects to reduce gaps between research and practice. We describe an Amplify OnTrackNY project that used principles of community-based participatory research to meaningfully partner with individuals with lived experience and describe lessons learned. Method(s): Two individuals with lived experience were hired and coled decision-making about project selection and design. The project examined OnTrackNY provider, participant, and family perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on service delivery. To enhance the lived experience perspective, we hired two OnTrackNY graduates and a family member, and created mechanisms for team building and integration, and co-planning sessions. All team members contributed to the development of research questions, co-facilitated interviews/ focus groups, and participated in data analysis and dissemination. Result(s): Team members conducted focus groups and semi-structured interviews with 13 participants and five family members, presented results to various stakeholder groups, and are contributing to scientific publications. To ensure participation, our flexible working structure focused on promoting equity and building trust. Dedicated time ensured opportunities for meetings focused on mutual support, sharing, capacity building, and training in qualitative methods. Individuals with lived experience were in decision-making roles, created content, and led project activities embodying principles of power-sharing, reciprocity, and mutual learning. Orienting new team members to the office culture required extra effort. Conclusion(s): Provided sufficient time and infrastructure, it is feasible to meaningfully involve individuals with lived experience in quality improvement projects. Co-creation ensures that important perspectives are incorporated from the outset and procedures improve the relevance and uptake of research findings in the real world.