Effective engagement of a stakeholder advisory board in severe mental illness (SMI) research: A case study of a clinical trial to improve adherence among people with SMI and hypertension

Abstract

Objective: Poor adherence to antihypertensive medication occurs in 50%-80% of patients. An ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT) is evaluating a personalized mobile-health intervention in poorly adherent hypertensive persons with bipolar disorder. To enhance efficacy, the ongoing trial elicited guidance from a Stakeholder Advisory Board (SAB) comprised of patients, family members, clinicians, and health system administrators. Our goal is to describe the formation, role, decision-making process, and key contributions of the SAB as a means of demonstrating meaningful community engagement in mental health research.
Methods: Using models and measures from the field of implementation science, eleven SAB members convened across three meetings followed by quantitative surveys that assessed SAB member satisfaction and engagement during the meetings.
Results: Significant suggestions from the SAB included 1) expanding inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 2) operationalizing remote implementation of the RCT. Primary study implementation challenges identified by the SAB were 1) participant difficulty engaging in the mHealth intervention, and 2) identification of procedures for monitoring participant adherence to the RCT protocol and contacting under-engaged participants. Quantitative surveys indicated that all SAB members believed that the objectives of the meetings were clear, perceived that they were able to participate in the discussions, and that they were heard.
Conclusions: Increasing evidence demonstrates the feasibility of engaging with SABs in clinical research and that this process improves intervention design, increases participant engagement, reduces mental health-related stigma, and produces more effective implementation strategies. We encourage future investigators to use an implementation science framework in partnership with SABs to refine their proposed interventions and improve clinical outcomes.

Keywords

Community engagement / Bipolar disorder / Medication adherence / mHealth, Text messaging / Implementation / RE-AIM framework, Blood pressure

References

[1] Barger S, Sullivan SD, Bell-Brown A, et al. Effective stakeholder engagement: design and implementation of a clinical trial (SWOG S1415CD) to improve cancer care. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019; 19(1): 119. PMid:31185918. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0764-2

[2] Goodman MS, Sanders Thompson VL. The science of stakeholder engagement in research: classification, implementation, and evaluation. Transl Behav Med. 2017; 7(3): 486-91. PMid:28397159.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-017-0495-z

[3] Hamilton AB, Brunner J, Cain C, et al. Engaging multilevel stakeholders in an implementation trial of evidence-based quality improvement in VA women’s health primary care. Transl Behav Med. 2017; 7(3):478-85. PMid:28585163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-017-0501-5

[4] Harrison JD, Auerbach AD, Anderson W, et al. Patient stakeholder engagement in research: A narrative review to describe foundational principles and best practice activities. Health Expect. 2019; 22(3):307-16. PMid:30761699. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12873

[5] Walker ER, Zahn R, Druss BG. Applying a Model of Stakeholder Engagement to a Pragmatic Trial for People With Mental Disorders. Psychiatr Serv. 2018; 69(11): 1127-30. PMid:30089446.https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201800057

[6] Abrams R, Park S, Wong G, et al. Lost in reviews: Looking for the involvement of stakeholders, patients, public and other non-researcher contributors in realist reviews. Res Synth Methods. 2021; 12(2): 239-47. PMid:32985074. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1459

[7] Bateman LB, Schoenberger YM, Hansen B, et al. Confronting COVID-19 in under-resourced, African American neighborhoods:a qualitative study examining community member and stakeholders’ perceptions. Ethn Health. 2021; 26(1): 49-67. PMid:33472411.https://doi.org/10.1080/13557858.2021.1873250

[8] Faija CL, Gellatly J, Barkham M, et al. Enhancing the Behaviour Change Wheel with synthesis, stakeholder involvement and decisionmaking: a case example using the ’Enhancing the Quality of Psychological Interventions Delivered by Telephone’ (EQUITy) research programme. Implement Sci. 2021; 16(1): 53. PMid:33990207.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01122-2

[9] Hornbuckle LM, Rauer A. Engaging a Community Advisory Board to Inform an Exercise Intervention in Older African-American Couples. J Prim Prev. 2020; 41(3): 261-78. PMid:32410065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-020-00589-x

[10] Kogan JN, Schuster J, Nikolajski C, et al. Challenges encountered in the conduct of Optimal Health: A patient-centered comparative effectiveness study of interventions for adults with serious mental illness. Clin Trials. 2017; 14(1): 5-16. PMid:27681658.https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774516670895

[11] Connors E, Selove R, Canedo J, et al. Improving Community Advisory Board Engagement in Precision Medicine Research to Reduce Health Disparities. J Health Dispar Res Pract. 2019; 12(6): 80-94.

[12] Deverka PA, Lavallee DC, Desai PJ, et al. Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement. J Comp Eff Res. 2012; 1(2): 181-94.PMid:22707880. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.12.7

[13] Petkovic J, Riddle A, Akl EA, et al. Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation. Systematic Reviews. 2020; 9(1): 1-11. PMid:32007104. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-1272-5

[14] Gaglio B, Shoup JA, Glasgow RE. The RE-AIM framework: a systematic review of use over time. Am J Public Health. 2013; 103(6):e38-46. PMid:23597377. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301299

[15] Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health. 1999; 89(9): 1322-7.PMid:10474547. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322

[16] Minkler M, Salvatore A, Chang C. Participatory approaches for study design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health: Translating Science to Practice. 2012; 192: 212. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199751877.003.0010

[17] Adams J, Scott J. Predicting medication adherence in severe mental disorders. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2000; 101(2): 119-24. PMid:10706011. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0447.2000.90061.x

[18] Esmail L, Moore E, Rein A. Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. 2015; 4(2): 133-45.PMid:25825842. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.14.79

[19] McDavitt B, Bogart LM, Mutchler MG, et al. Peer Reviewed: Dissemination as Dialogue: Building Trust and Sharing Research Findings Through Community Engagement. Preventing Chronic Disease. 2016; 13. PMid:26986541. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd13.150473

[20] Concannon TW, Fuster M, Saunders T, et al. A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patientcentered outcomes research. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2014; 29(12): 1692-701. PMid:24893581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2878-x

[21] Concannon TW, Meissner P, Grunbaum JA, et al. A new taxonomy for stakeholder engagement in patient-centered outcomes research. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2012; 27(8): 985-91. PMid:22528615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2037-1