Publication

A National Survey Comparing Patients' and Transplant Professionals' Research Priorities in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study

Journal Paper/Review - May 18, 2022

Units
PubMed
Doi

Citation
Beckmann S, Psychosocial Interest Group, De Geest S, Huynh-Do U, Binet F, Boehler A, Lovis C, Rochat J, Schick L, Mauthner O, Swiss Transplant Cohort Study. A National Survey Comparing Patients' and Transplant Professionals' Research Priorities in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10255.
Type
Journal Paper/Review (English)
Journal
Transpl Int 2022; 35
Publication Date
May 18, 2022
Issn Electronic
1432-2277
Pages
10255
Brief description/objective

We aimed to identify, assess, compare and map research priorities of patients and professionals in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study. The project followed 3 steps. 1) Focus group interviews identified patients' ( = 22) research priorities. 2) A nationwide survey assessed and compared the priorities in 292 patients and 175 professionals. 3) Priorities were mapped to the 4 levels of Bronfenbrenner's ecological framework. The 13 research priorities (financial pressure, medication taking, continuity of care, emotional well-being, return to work, trustful relationships, person-centredness, organization of care, exercise and physical fitness, graft functioning, pregnancy, peer contact and public knowledge of transplantation), addressed all framework levels: patient ( = 7), micro ( = 3), meso ( = 2), and macro ( = 1). Comparing each group's top 10 priorities revealed that continuity of care received highest importance rating from both (92.2% patients, 92.5% professionals), with 3 more agreements between the groups. Otherwise, perspectives were more diverse than congruent: Patients emphasized patient level priorities (emotional well-being, graft functioning, return to work), professionals those on the meso level (continuity of care, organization of care). Patients' research priorities highlighted a need to expand research to the micro, meso and macro level. Discrepancies should be recognized to avoid understudying topics that are more important to professionals than to patients.