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

Community midwives' and health visitors' experiences of research recruitment: a qualitative exploration using the Theoretical Domains Framework

BACKGROUND

Successful research is frequently hampered by poor study recruitment, especially in community settings and with participants who are women and their children. Health visitors (HVs) and community midwives (CMs) are well placed to invite young families, and pregnant and postnatal women to take part in such research, but little is known about how best to support these health professionals to do this effectively.

AIM

This study uses the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore the factors that influence whether HVs and CMs invite eligible patients to take part in research opportunities.

METHOD

HVs (n = 39) and CMs (n = 22) working in four NHS Trusts and one community partnership in England completed an anonymous, online survey with open-ended questions about their experiences of asking eligible patients to take part in the research. Qualitative data were analysed using directed content analysis and inductive coding to identify specific barriers and enablers to patient recruitment within each of the 14 theoretical domains.

FINDINGS

Six key TDF domains accounted for 81% of all coded responses. These were (a) environmental context and resources; (b) beliefs about capabilities; (c) social/professional role and identity; (d) social influences; (e) goals; (f) knowledge. Key barriers to approaching patients to participate in the research were time and resource constraints, perceived role conflict, conflicting priorities, and particularly for HVs, negative social influences from patients and researchers. Enablers included feeling confident to approach patients, positive influence from peers, managers and researchers, beliefs in the relevance of this behaviour to health care and practice and good knowledge about the study procedures, its rationale and the research topic. The findings suggest that to improve research recruitment involving HVs and CMs, a package of interventions is needed to address the barriers and leverage the enablers to participant approach.

Motivators and challenges to research recruitment - A qualitative study with midwives

OBJECTIVE

To explore midwives' experiences of recruiting participants to research studies conducted by other researchers.

DESIGN

An inductive qualitative study.

METHODS

Individual face-to-face or telephone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were analysed thematically.

SETTINGS

One large urban maternity hospital in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

A purposive sample of 19 midwives FINDINGS: Three co-dependent themes emerged: intrinsic motivations, extrinsic motivations and challenges. Intrinsic motivations included midwives' personal beliefs about the value of research in general, its potential to improve practice, and their perceptions of how robust a particular study was and how it might impact on an individual woman and her baby. This included an inherent desire to shield some women, those who were perceived to have ongoing health issues or be anticipating a sub-optimal pregnancy outcome, from being offered study information. Extrinsic motivations related to the complexity of a research study and a specific researcher's characteristics. Challenges to offering potential participants research study information and, therefore, to successful recruitment included time constraints, workload and the volume of research being conducted simultaneously.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Participants navigated the two, sometimes competing, worlds of clinical practice and clinical research. Set in the context of workload and the volume of research being conducted simultaneously, midwives' perceptions of a study's robustness, clarity, its potential impact on individual women and ability to improve practice governed their motivation to offer information on research studies to potential participants.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Inviting clinicians to assess the study information may improve its clarity and create opportunities to discuss the potential value and recruitment bias. Researchers should be available to address clinicians' questions about particular research studies. At an organisational level, a system for managing the volume of research activity is required.

When Nursing Care and Clinical Trials Coincide: A Qualitative Study of the Views of Nordic Oncology and Hematology Nurses on Ethical Work Challenges

This study investigated the kinds of ethical challenges experienced by nurses in oncology and hematology when nursing care and research overlap in clinical trials, and how the nurses handle such challenges. Individual interviews with 39 nurses from Sweden, Denmark, and Finland indicated that all nurses were positive about research, considering it essential for developing the best care. Ethical challenges exist, however; the most difficult were associated with the end-of-life patients, no longer responsive to standard therapy, who eagerly volunteer for cutting-edge drug trials in the hope of gaining therapeutic benefit. Many nurses lacked systematic strategies for addressing such challenges but found support from their nursing colleagues and relied on the research protocols to guide them.

Collaborative partnership and the social value of clinical research: a qualitative secondary analysis

BACKGROUND

Protecting human subjects from being exploited is one of the main ethical challenges for clinical research. However, there is also a responsibility to protect and respect the communities who are hosting the research. Recently, attention has focused on the most efficient way of carrying out clinical research, so that it benefits society by providing valuable research while simultaneously protecting and respecting the human subjects and the communities where the research is conducted. Collaboration between partners plays an important role and that is why we carried out a study to describe how collaborative partnership and social value are emerging in clinical research.

METHODS

A supra-analysis design for qualitative descriptive secondary analysis was employed to consider a novel research question that pertained to nurse leaders' perceptions of ethical recruitment in clinical research and the ethics-related aspects of clinical research from the perspective of administrative staff. The data consisted of two separate pre-existing datasets, comprising 451 pages from 41 interviews, and we considered the research question by using deductive-inductive content analysis with NVivo software. A deductive analysis matrix was generated on the basis of two requirements, namely collaborative partnership and social value, as presented in An Ethical Framework for Biomedical Research by Emanuel et al.

RESULTS

The findings showed that collaborative partnership was a cornerstone for ethical clinical research and ways to foster inter-partner collaboration were indicated, such as supporting mutual respect and equality, shared goals and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. In addition, the social value of clinical research was an important precondition for ethical clinical research and its realisation required the research partners to demonstrate collaboration and shared responsibility during the research process. However, concerns emerged that the multidimensional meaning of clinical research for society was not fully recognised. Achieving greater social value for clinical research required greater transparency, setting research priorities, shared responsibility for the dissemination and use of the findings and stronger community awareness of the ethics-related aspects of clinical research.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative partnership and social values are essential for protecting the human subjects and communities involved in clinical research.

Specialist nurses' perceptions of inviting patients to participate in clinical research studies: a qualitative descriptive study of barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Increasing the number of patients participating in research studies is a current priority in the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom. The role of specialist nurses in inviting patients to participate is important, yet little is known about their experiences of doing so. The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions of barriers and facilitators held by specialist nurses with experience of inviting adult NHS patients to a wide variety of research studies.

METHODS

A cross-sectional qualitative descriptive study was conducted between March and July 2015. Participants were 12 specialist nurses representing 7 different clinical specialties and 7 different NHS Trusts. We collected data using individual semi-structured interviews, and analysed transcripts using the Framework method to inductively gain a descriptive overview of barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

Barriers and facilitators were complex and interdependent. Perceptions varied among individuals, however barriers and facilitators centred on five main themes: i) assessing patient suitability, ii) teamwork, iii) valuing research, iv) the invitation process and v) understanding the study. Facilitators to inviting patients to participate in research often stemmed from specialist nurses' attitudes, skills and experience. Positive research cultures, effective teamwork and strong relationships between research and clinical teams at the local clinical team level were similarly important. Barriers were reported when specialist nurses felt they were providing patients with insufficient information during the invitation process, and when specialist nurses felt they did not understand studies to their satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Our study offers several new insights regarding the role of specialist nurses in recruiting patients for research. It shows that strong local research culture and teamwork overcome some wider organisational and workload barriers reported in previous studies. In addition, and in contrast to common practice, our findings suggest research teams may benefit from individualising study training and invitation procedures to specialist nurses' preferences and requirements. Findings provide a basis for reflection on practice for specialist nurses, research teams, policymakers, and all with an interest in increasing patient participation in research.