Towards improved organisational support for nurses working in research roles in the clinical setting: A mixed method investigation

Transitioning to the clinical research nurse role - A qualitative descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Studies have reported on the important role of the clinical research nurse in clinical studies. Yet, there is no international consensus about the role's competencies and tasks. Furthermore, the literature offers a little description of the career pathway from a ward-based registered nurse to a clinical research nurse. More knowledge about this specific role could benefit the nursing profession as well as increase the quality of clinical research.

AIM

The aim of the study was to explore Swedish registered nurses' experiences transitioning into the clinical research nurse role.

DESIGN

The study had a qualitative design. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews. Inductive qualitative content analysis was employed.

METHODS

Ten participants (i.e., clinical research nurses) were interviewed in the spring of 2017. A semi-structured interview guide was used to address the transition into the clinical research nurse role, experience working in a new role, experience of ethical dilemmas and experience of organizational and professional issues related to the role. The interviews were analysed inductively using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The registered nurses described experiencing reality shock when they became clinical research nurses; that is, it was a challenging and transforming experience. The main theme, a challenging transition, was developed from the four subthemes highlighting that it defied their previous nursing role. They experienced an unclear professional identity, extended professional mandate, increased professional status and growing ethical consciousness in their new role.

CONCLUSION

The results highlight that registered nurses who became clinical research nurses had needs that were both distinct from and overlapped with those of their former professional role as registered nurses. To avoid reality shocks, the development of clear competence pathways for nurses to become clinical research nurses, including introduction, mentorship and continued support, is necessary. Making their professional title more homogeneous, nationally and internationally, would facilitate role identification and comparisons in research.

Duality of practice in clinical research nursing

Background

International evidence suggests that Clinical Research Nurses (CRN) can have a dual role incorporating both clinical care and research responsibilities. This duality of role often assists in meeting the clinical care and research needs of the participants and can contribute to the credibility of the CRN role. Conversely, it can also lead to feelings of confusion and role conflict as CRN's time is divided.

Aim

To identify and explore experiences of clinical and research roles among CRNs. This emerged as a theme in a wider research project exploring CRNs' experiences of working with clinical nurses.

Methods

Following an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis approach, 10 CRNs participated in face-to-face semi-structured interviews. Transcribed data were analysed and a number of themes emerged. Duality of role was one of these.

Findings

Findings indicated that if CRNs fulfil a dual role, this can assist in care provision, research delivery and in building positive relationships with clinical nurses. However, there were also instances when a dual role led to clinical nurses questioning the value of research and to issues with competing demands of clinical care and research. These experiences had an important impact on some of the CRNs and led to reflection on the value of their role.

Conclusions

This study identifies new understandings of a dual role of the CRN. The findings will inform the preparation and practice of this group of nurses, whilst also leading to a deeper understanding of the CRN's role in care and research delivery. It will also contribute to a wider appreciation of organisational factors and social interactions that impact on health care research.

The Leadership Mentoring in Nursing Research Program for Postdoctoral Nurses: A Development Paper

PURPOSE

The Dutch Nursing Science Faculties developed the Leadership Mentoring in Nursing Research program, which aims to increase the cadre of nurse scientists, strengthen nursing research within universities, and improve the career development of postdoctoral nurses. The purpose of this article was to describe the development of the leadership and mentoring program to foster its replication and to present a formative program evaluation.

DESIGN

The leadership mentoring program was developed using a three-step procedure: a systematic review of the literature on successful leadership programs was conducted; theoretical underpinnings were identified and input; and feedback was solicited from national and international experts and changes made, resulting in the final program, which was executed from February 2016-2018.

FINDINGS

A 2-year leadership and mentoring program for postdoctoral nurses working in research was developed and executed. Ten fellows completed the program and worked on their leadership development, developed their own research programs, and established research collaborations. Formative evaluations showed that the fellows highly valued the program sessions. We have learned several key lessons on how to structure, implement, and evaluate the leadership and mentoring program.

CONCLUSIONS

Through the leadership and mentoring program, the fellows are immersed in concerted leadership development focusing on the academic leadership role. Formative evaluations showed that the program was valued by the fellows and that several key lessons were learned.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Through the leadership and mentoring program, 10 postdoctoral nurses strengthened their leadership in research and will further develop their role in healthcare research, clinical practice, and education.

Understanding the Broker Role of Clinician-Scientists: A Realist Review on How They Link Research and Practice

PURPOSE

Clinician-scientists are said to be well placed to connect research and practice, but their broker role has been underexplored. This review sought to gain an understanding of the broker role of clinician-scientists.

METHOD

The authors conducted a realist review to describe context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations associated with the broker role of clinician-scientists. CINAHL, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Embase were searched between May and August 2017. Data were analyzed qualitatively; data synthesis focused on assembling CMO configurations.

RESULTS

Of an initial 2,241 articles, 9 were included in the final review. Included papers show that clinician-scientists, in their broker role, achieve 2 organizational-level outcomes: an increased volume of clinically relevant, research, and increased evidence application to improve care. They also achieve the individual-level outcome of professional development as a researcher, clinician, and broker. Multidimensional skills and management support are necessary context factors. Mechanisms that contribute to outcomes include balancing economic and scientific interests and performing boundary-crossing activities. Four CMO configurations by which clinician-scientists achieve outcomes in brokering a connection between research and practice were identified. Useful program theories for explaining these are boundary crossing, social network, communities of practice, and diffusion of innovation theory.

CONCLUSIONS

The mechanisms found may provide insight for interventions aiming to support clinician-scientists in their broker role. The authors expect that if more attention is paid to learning multidimensional skills and management support for the broker role is strengthened, stronger links between research and practice could be forged.

Challenges and facilitators for health practitioners and academics engaging in collaborative research and publication: A systematic review / Herausforderungen und Förderfaktoren für gemeinsame Forschung und wissenschaftliche Publikation von Angehörigen verschiedener Gesundheitsberufe aus Praxis und Forschung: ein systematischer Review

Introduction

While academics are frequently engaged in research activities and subsequent dissemination of results through publication, all too often they occur without health practitioner involvement. While there are contemporary expectations that health practitioners will be active contributors to their discipline’s body of knowledge, many find it difficult to prioritise research involvement given the demands of direct patient care. With this awareness as a central focus, we undertook a literature review to identify the challenges and facilitators that impact on health practitioners and academics working collaboratively on research and publishing their findings in peer-reviewed journals.

Methods

A configurative systematic review was performed with six electronic databases (Proquest, CINAHL, Medline, ScienceDirect, ERIC, SocINDEX) searched for studies from the disciplines of nursing, social work, allied health professions, health management, psychology and sociology. Manual searches were also undertaken to minimise the risk of missed studies. A rigorous search and retrieval process identified 20 relevant studies for inclusion in the review. The studies were first critically appraised then summarised. These steps were followed by thematic synthesis of the findings of the reviewed studies.

Results

Challenges and facilitators to health practitioners and academics working collaboratively on research activities were found to be related to the interplay between practitioners, academics, educational and health institutions and professional demands. The interplay of these factors emerged as complex.

Conclusion

Strategies have been recommended that may encourage active partnerships between institutions, health practitioners and academics enabling greater research collaborations and subsequent increased publication of their combined achievements.

Factors affecting recruitment and retention of nurses who deliver clinical research: A qualitative study

AIM

To provide a better understanding of the factors affecting recruitment and retention of clinical research nurses.

DESIGN

Qualitative exploratory design.

METHODS

An on-line questionnaire comprising open-ended and fixed-choice questions was completed by 121 clinical research nurses. Seven focus groups were held with a subgroup of 26 participants. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants were attracted to a research nurse post by an interest in research itself, a desire for a change or to achieve personal objectives. The majority expected to continue in a research post for the next 5 years, while others expected to move on to research management, a clinical post or retirement; few had ambitions to become an independent researcher. Factors identified in focus groups as leading to intentions to leave research included desire for further change, concern about loss of clinical skills, rebalancing family/work responsibilities, short-term contracts, unsupportive employers and limited career progression.

Leadership mentoring in nursing research, career development and scholarly productivity: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although nursing has been an academic discipline for decades, the infrastructure for nursing research in many countries is still fragile and struggling. Postdoctoral nurses have difficulties developing sustaining careers in nursing research due to lack of career opportunities. Considerable research has been conducted on leadership and mentoring in various areas of nursing. We aimed to systematically review the literature investigating leadership programs and mentoring for postdoctoral nurse researchers, as well as the influence of leadership and mentoring on research productivity, research career development, leadership knowledge and skills, the nurses' health and well-being, staff relationships, work culture and collaboration, salaries and postdoctoral nurses' experiences.

METHODS

A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was conducted. The electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched without time limits for eligible studies up to January 2016. Reference lists of included articles were also searched manually and authors were contacted to inquire about other relevant papers. Two authors independently assessed eligibility of studies for inclusion. Titles and abstracts were matched with the inclusion criteria: studies investigating leadership and mentoring programs for postdoctoral nurses and leadership and mentoring influencing research productivity, and career development; and leadership knowledge and skills and other outcomes. The quality of the studies was appraised using the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine for surveys, the Critical Appraisal Skill Program Qualitative Appraisal Checklist for qualitative studies, and a critical appraisal list for mixed methods studies. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data were extracted by two reviewers.

FINDINGS

We screened 1775 titles and abstracts, resulting in 15 studies, which included quantitative, descriptive, qualitative and mixed methods designs and involved 3855 postdoctoral nurses. Two studies presenting mentoring programs for postdoctoral nurses were identified. Other studies investigated the influence of mentoring on various outcomes. The findings showed a positive influence of mentoring on research productivity, including increase in publications and grant writing and research career development, improved leadership skills and knowledge. Furthermore, mentoring positively influenced nurses' health and well-being, staff relationships, work culture and collaboration. Postdoctoral nurses' experience of mentoring, mentorship, leadership and peer-support is essential in supporting ongoing research activity.

CONCLUSION

Although there is a lack of studies with robust designs investigating leadership and mentoring programs, our results document some evidence of mentoring's influence on research productivity, career development and other outcomes of postdoctoral nurses.

Resolving Rivalries and Realigning Goals: Challenges of Clinical and Research Multiteam Systems

This article describes the care processes for a 64-year-old man with newly diagnosed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who was enrolled in a first-line clinical trial of a new immunotherapy regimen. The case highlights the concept of multiteam systems in cancer clinical research and clinical care. Because clinical research represents a highly dynamic entity-with studies frequently opening, closing, and undergoing modifications-concerted efforts of multiple teams are needed to respond to these changes while continuing to provide consistent, high-level care and timely, accurate clinical data. The case illustrates typical challenges of multiteam care processes. Compared with clinical tasks that are routinely performed by single teams, multiple-team care greatly increases the demands for communication, collaboration, cohesion, and coordination among team members. As the case illustrates, the described research team and clinical team are separated, resulting in suboptimal function. Individual team members interact predominantly with members of their own team. A considerable number of team members lack regular interaction with anyone outside their team. Accompanying this separation, the teams enact rivalries that impede collaboration. The teams have misaligned goals and competing priorities that create competition. Collective identity and cohesion across the two teams are low. Research team and clinical team members have limited knowledge of the roles and work of individuals outside their team. Recommendations to increase trust and collaboration are provided. Clinical providers and researchers may incorporate these themes into development and evaluation of multiteam systems, multidisciplinary teams, and cross-functional teams within their own institutions.

Creating an interest in research and development as a means of reducing the gap between theory and practice in primary care: an interventional study based on strategic communication

Today, healthcare professionals are faced with the challenge of implementing research results in an optimal way. It is therefore important to create a climate that is conducive to research and development (R&D). For this reason, new strategies are required to enhance healthcare professionals’ interest in innovative thinking and R&D. Strategic communication with roots in sociology, psychology and political science was employed as a means of achieving long-term behavioural change. The aim of this study was to describe, follow up and evaluate a primary care intervention based on strategic communication intended to increase healthcare professionals’ interest in R&D over time. An interventional cohort study comprising all staff members (N = 1276) in a Swedish primary care area was initiated in 1997 and continued for 12 years. The intention to engage in R&D was measured on two occasions; at 7 and 12 years. Both descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were employed. The results demonstrated that the positive attitude to R&D increased over time, representing a first step towards new thinking and willingness to change work practices for the benefit of the patient. Strategic communication has not been previously employed as a scientific tool to create a long-term interest in R&D within primary care.

Nurse leaders' perceptions of the ethical recruitment of study subjects in clinical research

AIM

The aim of this study was to describe nurse leaders' perceptions of ethical recruitment in clinical research.

BACKGROUND

Nurse leaders are expected to get involved in clinical research, but there are few studies that focus on their role, particularly the ethical issues.

METHOD

Qualitative data were collected from ten nurse leaders using thematic one-to-one interviews and analysed with content analysis.

RESULTS

Nurse leaders considered clinical research at their workplace in relation to the key issues that enabled ethical recruitment of study subjects in clinical research. These were: early information and collaboration for incorporating clinical research in everyday work, an opportune and peaceful recruitment moment and positive research culture.

CONCLUSION

Getting involved in clinical research is part of the nurse leader's professional responsibility in current health care. They have an essential role to play in ensuring that recruitment is ethical and that the dignity of study subjects is maintained.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

The duty of nurse leaders is to maintain good contact with other collaborators and to ensure good conditions for implementing clinical research at their site. This requires a comprehensive understanding of the overall situation on their wards. Implementing clinical research requires careful planning, together with educating, supporting and motivating nursing staff.