1 / 23

The Working Together Relationship

The Working Together Relationship. Dr Katherine Froggatt Senior Lecturer International Observatory on End of Life Care Lancaster University, UK. Structure. Background Working together in health research Case study of an end of life peer education research project Review

chico
Download Presentation

The Working Together Relationship

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Working Together Relationship Dr Katherine Froggatt Senior Lecturer International Observatory on End of Life Care Lancaster University, UK

  2. Structure • Background • Working together in health research • Case study of an end of life peer education research project • Review • Understanding how we worked together • Implications

  3. Working together in research Tripp (1998) Users in control Researcher in control Shared control

  4. Case study Improving public awareness of end of life issues among older people in North Lancashire: A peer education approach Funded by North Lancashire PCT

  5. Acknowledgements • Lancaster Peer Education Team: Gail Capstick, Oliver Coles, Deirdre Jacks, Susan Lockett, Irene McGill,Jill Robinson, Janet Ross-Mills • Mary Matthiesen, Conversations for Life • Jane Seymour, University of Nottingham

  6. Aims and Objectives Aim: • To pilot a locally appropriate peer education programme on end of life issues for older adults Objectives • To design a personal portfolio to hold individually tailored end of life resources and information; • To undertake public end of life workshops for older members of the general public and their advocates; • To identify future partnerships for ongoing end of life public awareness work.

  7. Participatory Action Research • Key principles • Working with • Incorporating different ways of knowing • People’s experiences • Practical impact • Bringing about a change • Using cycles of action and review

  8. Participation with older people • Integral to study • Designed and undertaken by Lancaster Peer Education for End of Life Care group • Comprises members of general public, retired and/or active in working with older adults about issues of learning, plus researcher (KF)

  9. Methods • Strand 1: Development of personal end of life information and resources portfolio • Monthly meetings – September 2009 to March 2010 (prior and ongoing) • Record of meetings - notes • Personal reflections

  10. Strand 2: Development of a community workshop on end of life issues • Two workshops • Older adults • Advocates (health and social care professionals and volunteers from public and voluntary sector) • Preparation facilitated by external adviser Mary Mattheisen from Conversations for Life

  11. Process of portfolio development

  12. Looking to the Future portfolio • Introduction to the Portfolio • Who am I? • Personal Details • Life Contacts • Health Information • Important Documents • How I want to be cared for now and in the future • Anticipating Future Changes • After I Die • Further Information • Resources • Background

  13. Workshop Content Three sections Structure Personal stories Facilitated table discussions Feedback and wrap up • What are some things to think about? • How to begin planning • How to talk about these issues

  14. Workshops Attended by 35 participants Workshop 1 – 21 older participants • 18 women; 3 men • Age • All participants were over 55 years old, • 17 (85%) over 65 years old • 7 (35%) over 75 years old Workshop 2 – 14 professional and advocate participants • 11 women; 3 men • (1 older women) • Hospital, hospice, care home and voluntary sector backgrounds • Nurses, doctors, social workers

  15. Workshop Evaluation • Recognition of: • Shared concerns re future planning • Importance of doing this work and timing for this • Need to find practical ways to plan and talk to others • Portfolio - overall positively reviewed • Clear and comprehensive; identified as useful • But • How to ensure someone knows about it • How to keep information safe • How to access to resources for people without web access • For some too much to address at once

  16. In summary • Met our aims and objectives • Piloted a local peer education initiative • Designed a personal portfolio • Undertaken public end of life workshops • Identified future partnerships and further work

  17. Making sense of how we worked together • Continuum of involvement • Quality criteria for approach chosen

  18. Continuum of involvement

  19. Quality criteria for action research(Reason 2007) • The extent to which worthwhile practical purposes are addressed • Levels of democracy and participation • The different ways of knowing engaged with during the study • The extent to which the research has been and continues to be responsive and developmental

  20. Froggatt et al,(in press)

  21. In conclusion • Participatory action research offers one way to work together within research • In end of life peer education project we worked together: engagement and participation present for individuals and groups. • This facilitated development of: • peer group of educators • new knowledge and change • local spaces (events) for this to happen

  22. References • Froggatt K with Capstick C, Coles O, Jacks D, Lockett S, McGill I, Robinson J, Ross-Mills J, Matthiesen M. Addressing End of Life Issues through Peer Education and Action Research. In Stern T, Rauch F, Schuster A Townsend A. Action Research, Innovation and Change: International and Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Routledge, London. (In Press) • Reason, P. (2007) Choice and quality in action research. Journal of Management Inquiry 15(2), 187-203. • Tripp, D. Critical incidents in action inquiry. In: Shaklock G, & Smyth J. eds Being reflexive in critical educational and social research. London, Falmer Press 1998.: 36-49.

More Related