Advertisement

Patient-Centered Framework for Rehabilitation Research in Outpatient Settings

Published:March 16, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2022.02.016

      Abstract

      Conducting high-quality clinical research is dependent on merging scientific rigor with the clinical environment. This is often a complex endeavor that may include numerous barriers and competing interests. Overcoming these challenges and successfully integrating clinical research programs into clinical practice settings serving rehabilitation outpatients is beneficial from both a logistical perspective (eg, supports efficient and successful research procedures) and the establishment of a truly patient-centered research approach. Leveraging our experience with navigating this research-clinical care relationship, this article (1) proposes the Patient-Centered Framework for Rehabilitation Research, a model for integrating patient-centered research in an outpatient clinical setting that incorporates a collaborative, team-based model encompassing patient-centered values, as well as strategies for recruitment and retention, with a focus on populations living with disabilities or chronic diseases; (2) describes application of this framework in a comprehensive specialty multiple sclerosis center with both general strategies and specific examples to guide adaptation and implementation in other settings; and (3) discusses the effect of the framework as a model in 1 center, as well as the need for additional investigation and adaptation for other populations. The 5 interconnected principles incorporated in the Framework and which prioritize patient-centeredness include identifying shared values, partnering with the clinical setting, engaging with the population, building relationships with individuals, and designing accessible procedures. The Patient-Centered Framework for Rehabilitation Research is a model presented as an adaptable roadmap to guide researchers in hopes of not only improving individual patients’ experiences but also the quality and relevance of rehabilitation research as a whole. Future investigation is needed to test the Framework in other settings.

      Keywords

      List of abbreviations:

      MS (multiple sclerosis), NMSS (National Multiple Sclerosis Society), UW MS Center (UW Medicine Multiple Sclerosis Center)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Jesus TS
        • Bright F
        • Kayes N
        • Cott CA.
        Person-centred rehabilitation: what exactly does it mean? Protocol for a scoping review with thematic analysis towards framing the concept and practice of person-centred rehabilitation.
        BMJ Open. 2016; 6e011959
      1. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Patient-centered outcomes research. Available at:https://www.pcori.org/research-results/about-our-research/patient-centered-outcomes-research. Accessed November 18, 2020.

        • Graham JE
        • Middleton A
        • Roberts P
        • Mallinson T
        • Prvu-Bettger J.
        Health services research in rehabilitation and disability—the time is now.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018; 99: 198-203
        • Andrews Erin E.
        Disability as diversity: developing cultural competence.
        Oxford University Press, New York2020
        • Olsen LA
        • Saunders RS
        • McGinnis JM
        Clinical research, patient care, and learning that is real-time and continuous.
        Patients charting the course: citizen engagement and the learning health system: workshop summary. National Academies Press, Washington (DC)2011
        • Leach VA
        • McGeagh JD
        • Margelyte R
        • et al.
        Facilitating access to health research through a participatory research register: a feasibility study in outpatient clinics.
        Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018; 4: 6
        • Beck D
        • Asghar A
        • Kenworthy-Heinige T
        • et al.
        Increasing access to clinical research using an innovative mobile recruitment approach: the (MoRe) concept.
        Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020; 19100623
        • Chhatre S
        • Jefferson A
        • Cook R
        • et al.
        Patient-centered recruitment and retention for a randomized controlled study.
        Trials. 2018; 19: 205
        • Olkin R.
        Making research accessible to participants with disabilities.
        J Multicult Couns Devel. 2004; 32: 332-343
        • Swigris JJ.
        A Patient-centered approach to care and research in chronic disease.
        Am J Med Sci. 2019; 357: 85-86
      2. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute homepage. Available at: https://www.pcori.org/. Accessed November 18, 2020.

        • Sheridan S
        • Schrandt S
        • Forsythe L
        • Hilliard TS
        • Paez KA.
        Advisory panel on patient engagement (2013 inaugural panel). The PCORI engagement rubric: promising practices for partnering in research.
        Ann Fam Med. 2017; 15: 165-170
        • Ehde DM
        • Alschuler KN
        • Sullivan MD
        • et al.
        Improving the quality of depression and pain care in multiple sclerosis using collaborative care: The MS-care trial protocol.
        Contemp Clin Trials. 2018; 64: 219-229
        • Kratz AL
        • Alschuler KN
        • Ehde DM
        • et al.
        A randomized pragmatic trial of telephone-delivered cognitive behavioral-therapy, modafinil, and combination therapy of both for fatigue in multiple sclerosis: the design of the “COMBO-MS” trial.
        Contemp Clin Trials. 2019; 84105821
        • Ehde DM
        • Elzea JL
        • Verrall AM
        • Gibbons LE
        • Smith AE
        • Amtmann D.
        Efficacy of a telephone-delivered self-management intervention for persons with multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial with a one-year follow-up.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96: 1945-1958
        • Alschuler KN
        • Arewasikporn A
        • Nelson IK
        • Molton IR
        • Ehde DM.
        Promoting resilience in individuals aging with multiple sclerosis: results from a pilot randomized controlled trial.
        Rehabil Psychol. 2018; 63: 336-348
        • Silverman AM
        • Verrall AM
        • Alschuler KN
        • Smith AE
        • Ehde DM.
        Bouncing back again, and again: a qualitative study of resilience in people with multiple sclerosis.
        Disabil Rehabil. 2017; 39: 14-22
        • Ehde DM
        • Alschuler KN
        • Day MA
        • et al.
        Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain in multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial protocol.
        Trials. 2019; 20: 1-12
        • Fogel DB.
        Factors associated with clinical trials that fail and opportunities for improving the likelihood of success: a review.
        Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018; 11: 56-164
        • Epstein RM
        • Street RL.
        The values and value of patient-centered care.
        Ann Fam Med. 2011; 9: 100-103
      3. United States National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Bethesda, MD: National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; 1979. p 10.

        • Angstman KB
        • Bender RO
        • Bruce SM.
        Patient advisory groups in practice improvement: sample case presentation with a discussion of best practices.
        J Ambul Care Manage. 2009; 32: 328-332