Table 3 PAC members perspectives on barriers and facilitators to patient engagement in the RePORT project
From: Working together in health research: a mixed-methods patient engagement evaluation
Barriers encountered by the PAC | Facilitators identified by the PAC |
|---|---|
The virtual environment made it difficult to communicate and engage | There were meaningful engagement opportunities for PAC members |
Recruitment of diverse PAC members | The variety of perspectives on the PAC enhanced the research project. Monthly meetings were facilitated by a PRP chair to make sure that all voices were heard during these meetings |
The difficulty of managing and scheduling a large group especially in different provinces and time zones | Flexibility of the project in terms of time commitment and what tasks to be involved in |
Technical issues related to information sharing | Virtual meetings provide an opportunity for members from different locations (provinces) to meet |
Clarity of roles within the project especially at the beginning | Communication within the team was good and created a collaborative environment. Challenges were addressed together as a team as they arose |
Expectations of involvement in project were not always met for PRP | Capacity building opportunities for PRPs (workshops, training, mentorship) Contributions from PRPs were valued |
Recommendations to other research teams working with PRPs | |
|---|---|
Offer capacity development opportunities for PRPs | |
Offer compensation to PRPs | |
Provide flexibility in the involvement of PRPs | |
Include PRPs from the beginning of project to foster patient engagement | |
Use established guidelines and procedures for engaging PRPs | |
Include PRPs from diverse backgrounds including ethnicity, gender, language, abilities etc | |
Involve PRPs as peer mentors and for recruitment initiative | |
Encourage open communication |