ABSTRACT
Background: Clinical research in perioperative medicine requires the perspectives of patients and caregivers to increase its relevance and quality, benefiting both researchers and the community. Identifying these priorities will enable researchers, funders, and governing bodies to efficiently use scarce funding and resources. We aim to identify the top 10 research priorities in perioperative medical research in Australia. Methods: A mixed-methods, exploratory-sequential design will be conducted. The study will include five phases. Initially, a published open-ended survey gathered responses from the population (researchers, healthcare workers, and consumers) regarding uncertainties/questions relevant to the population about perioperative medical research. We collected 544 questions and quantitatively analysed and grouped them according to the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine-Core Outcomes Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC) endpoints. Using multicriteria decision-making software, workshops combining the population will be conducted to determine the top 10 priorities for perioperative medicine research for the Australian population. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval to conduct the study was obtained from the Alfred Health (Australia) Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 171/19). The findings will be disseminated in peer review publications, conferences, and dissemination across perioperative research networks. The top 10 priorities will be available to inform research funders, grant submissions, guidelines, and the population.
ABSTRACT
Consumer engagement (patient and public involvement) in perioperative medicine research is in its infancy. The patient experience and family/carer perspectives can provide an extra layer of insight to give more understanding as to what, why, and how we do research. Patients who have undergone surgery have a unique understanding of the issues, concerns, wants, and needs that they learned as a patient-they, therefore, can be considered as a professional given their experience(s)-thus warranting recognition as a partner in research. Knowledge of the consumer engagement literature and availability of resources should support anesthesia researchers aiming to include these perspectives in their research. This includes several existing engagement frameworks and assessment tools. We provide a framework for consumer engagement for adoption into anesthesia and other perioperative research. By incorporating the patient or caregiver into the design, funding application(s), data collection, and interpretation of the findings can be beneficial to all. This includes promoting knowledge and access to clinical trials, the wording of participant consent and information forms, methods of data collection, selection of important outcomes, and dissemination of results.
Subject(s)
Patient Participation , Humans , Perioperative Care , Perioperative PeriodABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Consumer engagement in clinical research is increasingly being prioritized by major funders such as the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of the Cochrane library, Embase, CINAHL PubMed and Medline to identify randomized clinical trials in surgery with perioperative outcomes conducted in Australia. All publications underwent review and thematic analysis to identify levels of consumer engagement and the inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS). RESULTS: From 5373 records, the full texts of 809 articles were retrieved, of which 41 clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. PROMS were identified in 63% of the trials as a primary or secondary outcome. Despite multiple available checklists and analysis tools, less than 2% of studies documented any consumer engagement apart from PROMS. CONCLUSION: There was very little consumer engagement in formulation, management, conduct and dissemination of the trial findings.
