Stakeholder engagement in eight comparative effectiveness trials in African Americans and Latinos with asthma.

BACKGROUND: The effects of stakeholder engagement, particularly in comparative effectiveness trials, have not been widely reported. In 2014, eight comparative effectiveness studies targeting African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos with uncontrolled asthma were funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) as part of its Addressing Disparities Program. Awardees were required to meaningfully involve patients and other stakeholders. Using specific examples, we describe how these stakeholders substantially changed the research protocols and in other ways participated meaningfully as full partners in the development and conduct of the eight studies. METHODS: Using the method content analysis of cases, we identified themes regarding the types of stakeholders, methods of engagement, input from the stakeholders, changes made to the research protocols and processes, and perceived benefits and challenges of the engagement process. We used summaries from meetings of the eight teams, results from an engagement survey, and the final research reports as our data source to obtain detailed information. The descriptive data were assessed by multiple reviewers using inductive and deductive qualitative methods and discussed in the context of engagement literature. RESULTS: Stakeholders participated in the planning, conduct, and dissemination phases of all eight asthma studies. All the studies included clinicians and community representatives as stakeholders. Other stakeholders included patients with asthma, their caregivers, advocacy organizations, and health-system representatives. Engagement was primarily by participation in advisory boards, although six of the eight studies (75%) also utilized focus groups and one-on-one interviews. Difficulty finding a time and location to meet was the most reported challenge to engagement, noted by four of the eight teams (50%). Other reported challenges and barriers to engagement included recruitment of stakeholders, varying levels of enthusiasm among stakeholders, controlling power dynamics, and ensuring that stakeholder involvement was reflected and had true influence on the project. CONCLUSION: Engagement-driven modifications led to specific changes in study design and conduct that were felt to have increased enrollment and the general level of trust and support of the targeted communities. The level of interaction described, between investigators and stakeholders in each study and between investigator-stakeholder groups, is-we believe-unprecedented and may provide useful guidance for other studies seeking to improve the effectiveness of community-driven research.

The goal of comparative clinical effectiveness research is to compare healthcare options and learn which work best for patients depending on their preferences and circumstances. Research efforts can be more effective when researchers engage stakeholders, such as patients, healthcare providers, and other members of the community­especially those communities or groups targeted by the planned research. Stakeholders can give their input throughout the research process to make sure the study will address questions and concerns that are most important and useful for participants. In 2014, the PCORI funded eight research studies that evaluated various ways to help African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos with poorly controlled asthma. These groups are underrepresented in asthma research but have higher rates of and more severe asthma for reasons that are poorly understood. The goal of this report is to show how stakeholders­including patients with asthma from these underrepresented groups, healthcare providers who care for patients with asthma, key representatives from the communities and others­participated as full partners in the eight studies and helped to improve the overall quality of the research and the relationship between the researchers and the community.

Case study of municipal air pollution policies: Houston's Air Toxic Control Strategy under the White Administration, 2004-2009.

Local government has traditionally played only a minor role in regulating airborne toxic pollutants. However, from 2004 to 2009, the City of Houston implemented a novel, municipality-based air toxics reduction strategy to address what it considered unacceptable health risks and an insufficient regulatory response from state and federal agencies. The city's effort to exert local control over stationary sources of air toxics represents a unique opportunity to study the selection and performance of policy tools and to consider their ramifications for the design of future air pollution control strategies. The results of this case study demonstrate the potential for municipal government to use a combination of cooperative and confrontational policies to stimulate responses from private industry and state and federal regulators as part of a strategy to address local air quality problems.