(P165) IMPROVING PATIENT ENGAGEMENT IN HEART FUNCTION PATIENTS: PATIENT AND RESEARCHER TOGETHER INITIATIVE (PARTI)

Background: Patient engagement (PE) is recognized as a strategy to improve health research outcomes and achieve more targeted research goals. Currently, there is a lack of evidence and resources on effectively recruiting and matching patient partners with research opportunities, which creates challenges for institutions seeking to engage patients and for people with lived experience (PWLE) seeking to be involved. In partnership with the Canadian Heart Function (CHF) Alliance, a national cardiovascular research network, this project aims to identify factors and develop guidelines for meaningful research relationships when engaging and facilitating patient-oriented research.

METHODS AND RESULTS: A two-phase methodology explored the perspectives of patient partners, researchers, and matchers (those who facilitate the engagement) through virtual semi-structured interviews and a co-creation session. Phase 1 virtual semi-structured interviews included questions on prior experiences, equity and diversity consideration impacts, and the matching process's perceived value. It also investigated the need for a more cohesive engagement strategy and evaluated interest in digital incorporation. Stakeholders were recruited through snowball sampling, while the sample size was determined based on data saturation. Thematic analysis revealed trending beliefs and characterized improvement areas in the current patient-researcher matching process. Using the results of Phase 1, the Phase 2 co-creation session with the CHF Alliance team and Phase 1 participants will develop guidelines and an implementation plan for a concrete structured matching approach.

During Phase 1, we conducted 18 semi-structured interviews. Thematic data revealed these critical components: project/topic of interest, time and type of commitment, anticipated project timeline, format and frequency of communication between patient partners and study team and compensation. We found that patient partners face barriers, such as updating their availability, which may change over time. Both patient partners and researchers do not view technology as a hindrance, although simplicity in design is an essential factor. However, if necessary, a human connection should facilitate the process. Matchers identified that organizational readiness is critical, as it requires the uptake of resources and practices. Finally, an insight shared by all stakeholders is that knowing patients' expertise backgrounds outside of their diagnoses can provide valuable insights into a partnership.

Conclusion: Interview data revealed several factors typically considered in PE matching; however, many are not standardized in the process. These findings highlight the importance of promoting communication between the stakeholders. A co-creation session in Phase 2 will bring together different perspectives. By formalizing a structured approach, we can develop guidelines to improve the PE matching process.