RESUMEN
There have been repeated calls for academic institutions to develop policies and procedures to manage institutional conflicts of interest (ICOI) arising from technology transfer activities. While prior research has examined adoption of ICOI policies by medical schools and universities, little is known about how these institutions handle ICOI in practice, hindering the development of evidence-based recommendations to improve ICOI management. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 senior administrators responsible for research integrity and conflict of interest issues at academic institutions. Data were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative content analysis approach, combining flexible coding to index the interview data with close examination, interpretation, and synthesis of coded content. Participants identified communication and information sharing between conflict of interest (COI) and technology transfer (TT) offices as a critical factor in the effective management of ICOI and suggested several strategies to strengthen coordination between these offices. These findings suggest that academic research institutions could strengthen COI programs by taking measures to improve communication and information sharing between COI and TT offices.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Conflicto de Intereses , Transferencia de Tecnología , Humanos , Universidades , Difusión de la Información/métodos , Participación de los InteresadosRESUMEN
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Developing strategies to improve home dialysis use requires a comprehensive understanding of barriers. We sought to identify the most important barriers to home dialysis use from the perspective of patients, care partners, and providers. STUDY DESIGN: This is a convergent parallel mixed-methods study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: We convened a 7-member advisory board of patients, care partners, and providers who collectively developed lists of major patient/care partner-perceived barriers and provider-perceived barriers to home dialysis. We used these lists to develop a survey that was distributed to patients, care partners, and providers-through the American Association of Kidney Patients and the National Kidney Foundation. The surveys asked participants to (1) rank their top 3 major barriers (quantitative) and (2) describe barriers to home dialysis (qualitative). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We compiled a list of the top 3 patient/care partner-perceived and top 3 provider-perceived barriers (quantitative). We also conducted a directed content analysis of open-ended survey responses (qualitative). RESULTS: There were 522 complete responses (233 providers; 289 patients/care partners). The top 3 patient/care partner-perceived barriers were fear of performing home dialysis; lack of space; and the need for home-based support. The top 3 provider-perceived barriers were poor patient education; limited mechanisms for home-based support staff, mental health, and education; and lack of experienced staff. We identified 9 themes through qualitative analysis: limited education; financial disincentives; limited resources; high burden of care; built environment/structure of care delivery that favors in-center hemodialysis; fear and isolation; perceptions of inequities in access to home dialysis; provider perspectives about patients; and patient/provider resiliency. LIMITATIONS: This was an online survey that is subject to nonresponse bias. CONCLUSIONS: The top 3 barriers to home dialysis for patient/care partners and providers incompletely overlap, suggesting the need for diverse strategies that simultaneously address patient-perceived barriers at home and provider-perceived barriers in the clinic. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There are many barriers to home dialysis use in the United States. However, we know little about which barriers are the most important to patients and clinicians. This makes it challenging to develop strategies to increase home dialysis use. In this study, we surveyed patients, care partners, and clinicians across the country to identify the most important barriers to home dialysis, namely (1) patients/care partners identified fear of home dialysis, lack of space, and lack of home-based support; and (2) clinicians identified poor patient education, limited support for staff and patients, and lack of experienced staff. These findings suggest that patients and clinicians perceive different barriers and that both sets of barriers should be addressed to expand home dialysis use.
RESUMEN
COVID Watch is a remote patient monitoring program implemented during the pandemic to support home dwelling patients with COVID-19. The program conferred a large survival advantage. We conducted semi-structured interviews of 85 patients and clinicians using COVID Watch to understand how to design such programs even better. Patients and clinicians found COVID Watch to be comforting and beneficial, but both groups desired more clarity about the purpose and timing of enrollment and alternatives to text-messages to adapt to patients' preferences as these may have limited engagement and enrollment among marginalized patient populations. Because inclusiveness and equity are important elements of programmatic success, future programs will need flexible and multi-channel human-to-human communication pathways for complex clinical interactions or for patients who do not desire tech-first approaches.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Actitud Frente a la Salud , COVID-19 , Monitoreo Ambulatorio , Pacientes , Telemedicina , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Pandemias , Prioridad del Paciente , Pacientes/psicología , Pacientes/estadística & datos numéricos , Monitoreo Ambulatorio/métodos , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Investigación Cualitativa , Desarrollo de Programa , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , AncianoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many patients hospitalized for COVID-19 experience prolonged symptoms months after discharge. Little is known abou t patients' personal experiences recovering from COVID-19 in the United States (US), where medically underserved populations are at particular risk of adverse outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 hospitalization and barriers to and facilitators of recovery 1 year after hospital discharge in a predominantly Black American study population with high neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage. DESIGN: Qualitative study utilizing individual, semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 approximately 1 year after discharge home who were engaged in a COVID-19 longitudinal cohort study. APPROACH: The interview guide was developed and piloted by a multidisciplinary team. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were coded and organized into discrete themes using qualitative content analysis with constant comparison techniques. KEY RESULTS: Of 24 participants, 17 (71%) self-identified as Black, and 13 (54%) resided in neighborhoods with the most severe neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage. One year after discharge, participants described persistent deficits in physical, cognitive, or psychological health that impacted their current lives. Repercussions included financial suffering and a loss of identity. Participants reported that clinicians often focused on physical health over cognitive and psychological health, an emphasis that posed a barrier to recovering holistically. Facilitators of recovery included robust financial or social support systems and personal agency in health maintenance. Spirituality and gratitude were common coping mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent health deficits after COVID-19 resulted in downstream consequences in participants' lives. Though participants received adequate care to address physical needs, many described persistent unmet cognitive and psychological needs. A more comprehensive understanding of barriers and facilitators for COVID-19 recovery, contextualized by specific healthcare and socioeconomic needs related to socioeconomic disadvantage, is needed to better inform intervention delivery to patients that experience long-term sequelae of COVID-19 hospitalization.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Longitudinales , Hospitalización , Alta del Paciente , Atención a la Salud , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
COVID Watch is a remote patient monitoring program implemented during the pandemic to support home dwelling patients with COVID-19. The program conferred a large survival advantage. We conducted semi-structured interviews of 85 patients and clinicians using COVID Watch to understand how to design such programs even better. Patients and clinicians found COVID Watch to be comforting and beneficial, but both groups desired more clarity about the purpose and timing of enrollment and alternatives to text-messages to adapt to patientsâ™ preferences as these may have limited engagement and enrollment among marginalized patient populations. Because inclusiveness and equity are important elements of programmatic success, future programs will need flexible and multi-channel human-to-human communication pathways for complex clinical interactions or patients who do not desire tech-first approaches.
RESUMEN
Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) is a well-established resilience coaching program for youth with chronic illness. It is a one-on-one intervention targeting skills in stress management, goal-setting, cognitive reframing, and meaning-making. We aimed to (i) assess the feasibility and acceptability of PRISM and (ii) explore PRISM's impact on clinical outcomes among youth with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP). This was a single-arm pilot trial of PRISM for youth with CMP aged 12-17 years. Patients completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) pre- and post- intervention; patients and caregivers provided qualitative feedback. Twenty-seven patients were enrolled (63% enrollment rate); 82% percent were female. The patients' median age was 16 years (IQR: 13-16). The intervention completion rate was 81% (n = 22). The mean satisfaction for PRISM overall was 4.3 (SD 0.9), while the mean acceptability of the intervention measure (AIM) was 4.4 (SD 0.89). Participants reported improved resilience (2.2 [SD 5.1]), functional disability (-3.5 [IQR: -6.0, 1.0]), and psychological distress (-1.0 [-5.0, 2.0]) from baseline to immediately post-treatment; pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and global health were similar at both time points. Feedback was positive and suggested that a group component may be helpful. PRISM is feasible and acceptable among youth with CMP. Exploratory analyses suggest improvements in clinically relevant outcomes, warranting further investigation.