Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 Apr 25;25(1):135.
doi: 10.1186/s12875-024-02365-w.

Does engagement matter? The impact of patient and community engagement on implementation of cardiovascular health materials in primary care settings

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Does engagement matter? The impact of patient and community engagement on implementation of cardiovascular health materials in primary care settings

Linda Zittleman et al. BMC Prim Care. .

Abstract

Background: Engaging patients and community members in healthcare implementation, research and evaluation has become more popular over the past two decades. Despite the growing interest in patient engagement, there is scant evidence of its impact and importance. Boot Camp Translation (BCT) is one evidence-based method of engaging communities in research. The purpose of this report is to describe the uptake by primary care practices of cardiovascular disease prevention materials produced through four different local community engagement efforts using BCT.

Methods: EvidenceNOW Southwest (ENSW) was a randomized trial to increase cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in primary care practices. Because of its study design, Four BCTs were conducted, and the materials created were made available to participating practices in the "enhanced" study arm. As a result, ENSW offered one of the first opportunities to explore the impact of the BCT method by describing the uptake by primary care practices of health messages and materials created locally using the BCT process. Analysis compared uptake of locally translated BCT products vs. all other products among practices based on geography, type of practice, and local BCT.

Results: Within the enhanced arm of the study that included BCT, 69 urban and 13 rural practices participated with 9 being federally qualified community health centers, 14 hospital owned and 59 clinician owned. Sixty-three practices had 5 or fewer clinicians. Two hundred and ten separate orders for materials were placed by 43 of the 82 practices. While practices ordered a wide variety of BCT products, they were more likely to order materials developed by their local BCT.

Conclusions: In this study, patients and community members generated common and unique messages and materials for cardiovascular disease prevention relevant to their regional and community culture. Primary care practices preferred the materials created in their region. The greater uptake of locally created materials over non-local materials supports the use of patient engagement methods such as BCT to increase the implementation and delivery of guideline-based care. Yes, patient and community engagement matters.

Trial registration and irb: Trial registration was prospectively registered on July 31, 2015 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02515578, protocol identifier 15-0403). The project was approved by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board and the University of New Mexico Human Research Protections Office.

Keywords: Cardiovascular health; Community based participatory research; Primary care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

References

    1. Zerhouni EA. Translational and clinical science–time for a new vision. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(15):1621–3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb053723. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Westfall JM, Mold J, Fagnan L. Practice-based research–blue highways on the NIH roadmap. JAMA. 2007;297(4):403–6. doi: 10.1001/jama.297.4.403. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Graham RP, James PA, Cowan TM. Are clinical practice guidelines valid for primary care? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(9):949–54. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00224-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Westfall JM, Zittleman L, Felzien M, Norman N, Tamez M, Backlund-Jarquin P, et al. Reinventing the wheel of medical evidence: how the Boot Camp translation process is making gains. Health Aff (Millwood) 2016;35(4):613–8. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1648. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Holzer JK, Ellis L, Merritt MW. Why we need community engagement in medical research. J Investig Med. 2014;62(6):851–5. doi: 10.1097/JIM.0000000000000097. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources