| |
|
Sarah Eckermann & Libby Kalucy,
PHC RIS
Effective links are the result of successful partnerships between Divisions and researchers. As interest in these partnerships grows, we thought it would be fitting to highlight these partnerships to exemplify the different stages of effective links. This is the fourth instalment in a series of interviews that aim to capture the real life stories and examples of these collaborative partnerships. In this issue we interviewed Gawaine Powell Davies from the Centre for General Practice Integration Studies (CGPIS) and Vanessa Traynor, the PHCRED coordinator at the University of New South Wales, and asked them about the enablers and barriers to their most successful effective links projects.
Gawaine Powell Davies, through his work with the Integration Support and Evaluation Resource Unit (SERU), and Centre for General Practice Integration Studies at the University of New South Wales (UNSW), has been collaborating with Divisions since 1996. This has allowed him and his colleagues to gain knowledge and skills and develop extensive relationships with Divisions. "We continued to work with Divisions in one form or another for all that time, so there has been a transmission of memory and experience both on their end [Divisions] and on our end . I think our supporting role in the SERU and later around the Enhanced Primary Care items meant that we were seen as being, in a sense, on their side and for their benefit."
After some years as the NSW Primary Health Care Research and Development (PHCRED) state coordinator, Vanessa Traynor is now the PHCRED coordinator at the University of New South Wales (UNSW). She feels very fortunate to be part of a department with such a long history of effective links. "We were very fortunate, I think, having Gawaine and Professor Mark Harris, and all their links with Divisions, and all the work of the SERU etc. We have a huge number of established links with Divisions in the sector. That put us [UNSW research capacity building program] ahead compared to some other departments receiving research capacity building funding from PHCRED, where they really were building capacity absolutely from scratch."
When we asked Vanessa about her most successful project in terms of effective links, she identified a project on evaluating asthma 3+ plans led by Professor Nick Zwar conducted through PHCRED at UNSW. This project involved a number of the Divisions in south west Sydney, with whom they have long standing links dating back before 1996. As Vanessa explains, "that was probably the most successful project, mainly because GPs and Divisions, and GPs within Divisions really were involved in proper research. Proper in so far that it wasn't just another side project or evaluation, and instead was very collaborative, the authorship was very collaborative, and they published as a group." (Zwar 2005)
"It was a long, long hard haul, and it took a long time to get it published. The main barrier was working out how to communicate with each other, working out roles, and what is this whole thing is about". To enable such a successful project, Vanessa felt that that the existing links saved them "having to spend years building these links, because we already had a cohort of people."
Gawaine singled out a three year project on practice capacity to manage chronic disease care as another example of a successful research collaboration. During the project, UNSW worked with at least 27 Divisions across the country, collecting data from practices about their organisation and capacity and the impact it had on the quality of chronic disease care. "From our point of view it was successful because we established good research partnerships with the Divisions and practices, with the Divisions still being there and wanting to come and find out about the results, and maintaining contact. We still have a lot of contact with them around what it means."
"There were two barriers to this project. One was the logistics of working with practices across six states and territories - it's very expensive and it's very complicated. The second one was the burden the research put on the practices, and the need for Divisions to accept that and still support it. It required a certain amount of courage on their part."
Gawaine attributed the success of the project to the fact that it built on previous relationships. "We were very careful about building momentum and support. We had written an issues paper for the General Practice Partnership Advisory Council about it. At the start of the program we had run a national forum on practice capacity, to which 150 people came, where we really went through the issues. Divisions told us and each other what they were doing, and then we tried to think through what it meant and where things might go next. We plugged quite heavily into Divisions and their development, and also the policy side, so when we approached Divisions it wasn't out of the blue. They were aware of it, many of them were actively engaged, and it was also the right time. It was a time when they were building their programs, but not always fully confident they were doing the right thing. We had some very good champions, particularly in the SBOs, particularly in Victoria and Queensland, and ADGP. They supported us a lot, and we worked very actively with them in developing up the program."
Advice on working with Divisions on research
Vanessa and Gawaine also had further comments and some excellent advice on effective links to share with other researchers working with Divisions.
- Don't go to Divisions as a traditional academic with your latest bright idea for an international multi-centre trial on some obscure issue.
- It does take time to develop relationships, and you've got to go out and meet with people and not wait for them to come to you.
- You need to maintain the relationship in multitude of ways and involve Divisions in any decision making. For example, UNSW PHCRED has two Divisions represented on its management committee.
- Short-term secondment of Division staff is a very effective strategy for developing mutual understanding between researchers and Divisions
- Don't be surprised when Divisions don't want to be involved in the research you are doing. It may well be of no direct interest to them.
- Board members and CEOs with Divisions don't usually have a background in research. If you know a CEO of a Division who can see the potential and benefit of research, work with them, nurture them and the relationship, and give them support.
- The skill building work you do with Divisions is not necessarily going to be around how to design a research protocol, it might be around doing a needs assessment, it might be around more effective evaluation.
- Identify and address intellectual property issues such as authorship and acknowledgement at an early stage of a research partnership.
For further information contact:
Gawaine Powell Davies
Ph: 02 9385 1506
E: g.powell-davies@unsw.edu.au
Vanessa Traynor
Ph: 02 9385 2518
E: v.traynor@unsw.edu.au
PHCRED UNSW, CGPIS, CHETRE
Web: www.cphce.unsw.edu.au/
References:
Zwar, N.A., Comino, E.J., Hasan, I., Harris, M.F., Primary Health Care Research Network. (2005). General practitioner views on barriers and facilitators to implementation of the Asthma 3+ Visit Plan. [Electronic version] Med J Aust. Jul 18; 183(2): 64 - 7.
Building Capacity in General Practices: Record of proceedings of the National Forum on Practice Capacity for Chronic Disease Prevention and Management. Retrieved 15 April 2005, from http://www.cgpis.unsw.edu.au/files/Prac%20Cap%20Forum%20Rpt.pdf
|
