Evaluation of Consumer Participation Demonstration Projects in Five Australian Drug User Treatment Facilities: The Impact of Individual Versus Organizational Stability in Determining Project Progress

Abstract

This project evaluated consumer participation projects in five drug user treatment services in metropolitan and regional areas in three Australian states. Qualitative interviews were conducted with staff and consumers at two time points between 2008 from 2010 (n = 108). At baseline staff and some consumers focused on the stability of consumers to undertake representative roles. At postimplementation, the focus was on the stability of the organization, as frequent staffing changes and lack of adequate handover affected the progress of the projects. These issues combined with the perceived "noncore" status of consumer participation resulted in none of the projects achieving all of their agreed goals.

Conceptual frameworks and degrees of patient engagement in the planning and designing of health services: A scoping review of qualitative studies

“…Country of Publication. Among the 18 studies, seven (38.9%) were conducted in the United Kingdom, [41][42][43][44][45][46][47] five (27.8%) in Canada, [48][49][50][51][52] two (11.1%) in the Netherlands, 53-54 two (11.1%) in Australia, [55][56] one (5.6%) in Norway, 57 and one (5.6%) in Slovenia. 58 Study Setting.…”

“…54 Moreover, one study (5.6%) was conducted in a primary care setting only, 45 and two (11.1%) were conducted in both primary care and hospital settings. 44,58 Nine studies (50.0%) were conducted in specialized treatment health facilities for HIV/AIDS (3 studies; 16.7%), [46][47][48] mental health (3 studies; 16.7%), 43,55,57 drug treatment (2; 11.1%), 47,56 and stroke (1; 5.6%). 42 One study (5.6%) did not report a study setting, 53 one (5.6%) was conducted in homeless shelters, 52 and one (5.6%) was conducted within the Board of Directors of different health service organizations.…”

“…Among the most commonly used included qualitative description (3; 16.7%), [49][50][51] case study (2; 11.1%), 47,58 ethnography (2; 11.1%), 42,45 thematic analysis and adapted approaches (2; 11.1%), 41,43 and communitybased and participatory designs (2; 11.1%). 44,48 Among the least commonly employed designs and approaches were: discourse analysis (1; 5.6%), 55 realistic qualitative methods (1; 5.6%), 56 and grounded theory (1; 5.6%). 52 Four studies (22.2%) did not report a specific qualitative study design or analytic approach.…”

“…An equal number of studies reported multiple (9; 50.0%), [42][43][44][45][46][47]52,54,57 and single data collection methods (9; 50.0%). 41,[48][49][50][51]53,[55][56]58 Among the studies that used multiple methods, all used variations of semi-structured and/or in-depth interviews. [42][43][44][45][46][47]52,54,57 Seven (77.7% of 9) used focus groups, 43-47,52,57 three (33.3% of 9) used participant observation, 42,54,57 and three (33.3% of 9) used document analysis.…”

“…54 Seven of the total 18 studies (38.9%) did not explicitly identify with a particular degree of PE or explored all degrees of PE broadly. 41,[45][46][47]49,53,56 These studies examined none or multiple terms that depicted meaningful PE. Finally, two of 18 studies (11.1%) identified consultation as a degree of PE.…”