Clinician and Staff Perspectives on Participating in Practice-based Research: A WREN Report
This report presents the findings from a program evaluation of the Wisconsin Research & Education Network, focusing on clinician and staff perspectives on participating in practice-based research. The report includes the results from focus groups and a World Café session, highlighting themes, barriers, and facilitators to implementation. The report concludes with implications for moving forward and suggestions for extending this evaluation process to other PBRNs.
Clinician and Staff Perspectives on Participating in Practice-based Research: A WREN Report
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Clinician and Staff Perspectives on Participating in Practice-based Research: A Report from WRENAmanda E. Hoffmann, MPH and David L. Hahn, MD, MSWisconsin Research & Education Network (WREN)University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Department of Family Medicine and Community Health
Background • Wisconsin Research & Education Network (WREN) is a state-wide primary care PBRN • Founded in 1987 by the Wisconsin Academy of Family Practice (WAFP); now housed in the Dept. of Family Medicine and Community Health at UW School of Medicine & Public Health Map of WREN Project Locations
Objective • Conduct a program evaluation • Obtain clinician and staff perspectives • Focus Groups – Past performance • World Café – Future opportunities
Results: Focus Groups • Focus group members’ reactions to participating in 10 WREN projects • 5 major themes, each with 3-4 sub-themes • Receptivity to research • Outcomes as a result of participation • Barriers to implementation • Facilitators of success • Advice to researchers and colleagues
Results: Focus Groups • Previously identified sub-themes: • Improved clinical care • Improved systematic approaches • Teamwork and communication • Increased professional self-worth • Ability for staff members to “expand” into new roles
Results: Focus Groups • Previously identified barriers: • Excessive time and resources needed to conduct a project 2. Difficulty adapting new protocols alongside or in place of existing protocols
Results: Focus Groups • Additional clinic team comments not previously emphasized in the literature: • Clinic physicians, staff, patients and administrators should be part of the planning process 2. Barriers posed by healthcare consolidation
Methods: World Café • Setting: • Fun and relaxed environment • 5 tables with 10 people at each table • Participants pre-assigned a table for 1st round 2) Small Group Rounds: • Three 25 minute rounds to address 3 questions • “Table host” remained; others rotated • Host took notes, used a flip chart to summarize ideas, briefly summarized previous group’s ideas
Methods: World Café 3) Questions: Guided the conversation toward planning WREN’s future 4) Harvest: • After 3 rounds, a “Gallery Walk” was done to vote for their 3 favorite ideas • Results were presented at the end of the Convocation
Results: World Café – Round 1 Q1: In a perfect world, what does practice-based research look like or feel like? • Practice-based research becomes the norm in clinical practice • Sufficient resources (money/time) • Outcomes are meaningful for patient, clinic, and community • Everyone provides input • Patients demand to be a part!
Results: World Café – Round 2 Q2: Who does WREN need to bring to the table to help move toward this ideal? • Patients • Whole clinic team • Insurance/large health systems • Demonstrate value • Funders • Higher-ups/management • Administrative buy-in
Results: World Café – Round 3 Q3: Based on our picture of the perfect research world and the important stakeholders we want to include, what are the first steps WREN should take to go from here? • Market what we do • Expand our membership (increase diversity) • Engage key stakeholders (Summit) • Broadly disseminate study findings/outcomes
Subsequent Steps – Examples • Outreach* • Alignment • Prospective research agenda • WREN Convocation - October 15-16, 2015 • www.wren.wisc.edu * Sign up for WREN newsletter
Implications Moving Forward • Extending this program evaluation process may be of interest to other PBRNs: • Discussing ways researchers, clinic staff, patients and other stakeholders can partner to develop and implement research that resonates with all stakeholders
Thank you! QUESTIONS?