A national patient and public colorectal research agenda: integration of consumer perspectives in bowel disease through early consultation

A. G K McNair, N. Heywood, J. Tiernan, A. Verjee, S. P. Bach, N. S. Fearnhead*, Robert Arnott, Steven Ashdown-Phillips, Nick Bason, Christopher Challand, Anne Demick, Nicola Fearnhead, Richard Gardner, Greg Llewellyn, Robert Lopes de Azevedo Gilbert, Deena Harji, Dewi Morgan, Dion Morton, John Northover, Jenny PipeJoshua Scales, Asha Senapati, Doug Speake, Dale Vimalachandran, Catherine Walter, James Wheeler, ORACLE Collaboration

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Aim: There is a recognized need to include the views of patients and the public in prioritizing health research. This study aimed: (i) to explore patients’ views on colorectal research; and (ii) to prioritize research topics with patients and the public. Method: In phase 1, 12 charitable organizations and patient groups with an interest in bowel disease were invited to attend a consultation exercise. Participants were briefed on 25 colorectal research topics prioritized by members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. Focus groups were conducted and discussions were recorded with field notes. Analysis was conducted using principles of thematic analysis. In phase 2, a free public consultation was undertaken. Participants were recruited from newspaper advertisements, were briefed on the same research topics and were asked to rate the importance of each on a five-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to rank the topics. Univariable linear regression compared recorded demographic details with mean topic scores. Results: Focus groups were attended by 12 patients who highlighted the importance of patient-centred information for trial recruitment and when selecting outcome measures. Some 360 people attended the public consultation, of whom 277 (77%) were recruited. Participants rated ‘What is the best way to treat early cancer in the back passage?’ highest, with 227 (85%) scoring it 4 or 5. There was no correlation between participant demographics and mean topic scores. Conclusion: The present study prioritized a colorectal research agenda with the input of patients and the public. Further research is required to translate this agenda into real improvements in patient care.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)O75-O85
JournalColorectal Disease
Volume19
Issue number1
Early online date21 Nov 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 5 Jan 2017

Keywords

  • bowel disease
  • outcome selection
  • Patient and public involvement
  • priority setting partnership
  • research methodology
  • research priorities

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A national patient and public colorectal research agenda: integration of consumer perspectives in bowel disease through early consultation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this