Perspectives on Participating in Practice-based Research: A Report from WREN

1. Clinician and Staff Perspectives on Participating in Practice-based Research: A Report from WRENAmanda E. Hoffmann, MPH and David L. Hahn, MD, MSWisconsin Research & Education Network (WREN)University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Department of Family Medicine and Community Health

2. Background • Wisconsin Research & Education Network (WREN) is a state-wide primary care PBRN • Founded in 1987 by the Wisconsin Academy of Family Practice (WAFP); now housed in the Dept. of Family Medicine and Community Health at UW School of Medicine & Public Health Map of WREN Project Locations

3. Objective • Conduct a program evaluation • Obtain clinician and staff perspectives • Focus Groups – Past performance • World Café – Future opportunities

4. Methods: Focus Groups

5. Results: Focus Groups • Focus group members’ reactions to participating in 10 WREN projects • 5 major themes, each with 3-4 sub-themes • Receptivity to research • Outcomes as a result of participation • Barriers to implementation • Facilitators of success • Advice to researchers and colleagues

6. Results: Focus Groups • Previously identified sub-themes: • Improved clinical care • Improved systematic approaches • Teamwork and communication • Increased professional self-worth • Ability for staff members to “expand” into new roles

7. Results: Focus Groups • Previously identified barriers: • Excessive time and resources needed to conduct a project 2. Difficulty adapting new protocols alongside or in place of existing protocols

8. Results: Focus Groups • Additional clinic team comments not previously emphasized in the literature: • Clinic physicians, staff, patients and administrators should be part of the planning process 2. Barriers posed by healthcare consolidation

9. Methods: World Café • Setting: • Fun and relaxed environment • 5 tables with 10 people at each table • Participants pre-assigned a table for 1st round 2) Small Group Rounds: • Three 25 minute rounds to address 3 questions • “Table host” remained; others rotated • Host took notes, used a flip chart to summarize ideas, briefly summarized previous group’s ideas

10. Methods: World Café 3) Questions: Guided the conversation toward planning WREN’s future 4) Harvest: • After 3 rounds, a “Gallery Walk” was done to vote for their 3 favorite ideas • Results were presented at the end of the Convocation

11. Results: World Café – Round 1 Q1: In a perfect world, what does practice-based research look like or feel like? • Practice-based research becomes the norm in clinical practice • Sufficient resources (money/time) • Outcomes are meaningful for patient, clinic, and community • Everyone provides input • Patients demand to be a part!

12. Results: World Café – Round 2 Q2: Who does WREN need to bring to the table to help move toward this ideal? • Patients • Whole clinic team • Insurance/large health systems • Demonstrate value • Funders • Higher-ups/management • Administrative buy-in

13. Results: World Café – Round 3 Q3: Based on our picture of the perfect research world and the important stakeholders we want to include, what are the first steps WREN should take to go from here? • Market what we do • Expand our membership (increase diversity) • Engage key stakeholders (Summit) • Broadly disseminate study findings/outcomes

14. Subsequent Steps – Examples • Outreach* • Alignment • Prospective research agenda • WREN Convocation - October 15-16, 2015 • www.wren.wisc.edu * Sign up for WREN newsletter

15. Implications  Moving Forward • Extending this program evaluation process may be of interest to other PBRNs: • Discussing ways researchers, clinic staff, patients and other stakeholders can partner to develop and implement research that resonates with all stakeholders

16. Thank you! QUESTIONS?