Holding Firm: Power, Push-Back, and Opportunities in Navigating the Liminal Space of Critical Qualitative Health Research

Ready to Go Home? Nurses' Perspectives of Prolonged Admission for Patients Undergoing Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Denmark

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs with median postoperative hospitalization of 2 days improve outcomes after lung cancer surgery. This article explores nursing care practices for patients with lung cancer who remain hospitalized despite having recovered somatically. Qualitative focus group interviews were conducted with 16 nurses. Ricoeur's phenomenological hermeneutics underpins the methodology applied in this study, and we relied on Benner and Wrubel's theory. The nurses emphasized that the thoughts of patients with a recent lung cancer diagnosis revolve around more than the surgery. Nursing comprises not only practicalities but also attending to patients' stress and their coping with being struck with lung cancer and having undergone surgery. A counterculture emerged to counteract the logic of productivity, indicating that caring as a worthy end in itself may be underestimated in protocol-driven care. Prolonging hospitalization largely depends on clinical judgment. The nurses' aim is not to keep patients in the hospital but to avoid any needless suffering, allowing them to reclaim the primacy of caring.

"Come and share your story and make everyone cry": complicating service user educator storytelling in mental health professional education

It has become relatively common practice within health professional education to invite people who have used mental health and social care services (or service user educators) to share their stories with health professional learners and students. This paper reports on findings from a postcritical ethnographic study of the practice of service user involvement (SUI), in which we reflexively inquired into conceptualizations of service user educators' knowledge contributions to health professional education in the accounts of both service user- and health professional educators. This research was conducted in response to recent calls for greater scrutiny surrounding the risks, challenges, and complexities inherent in involving service users in health professional education spaces. 'Story/telling' was identified as a pronounced overarching construct in our analysis, which focuses on participants' reports of both the obvious and more subtle tensions and complexities they experience in relation to storytelling as a predominant tool or approach to SUI. Our findings are presented as three distinct, yet overlapping, themes related to these complexities or tensions: (a) performative expectations; (b) the invisible work of storytelling; and (c) broadening conceptualizations of service user educators' knowledge. Our findings and discussion contribute to a growing body of literature which problematizes the uncritical solicitation of service user educators' stories in health professional education and highlights the need for greater consideration of the emotional and epistemic labour expected of those who are invited to share their stories. This paper concludes with generative recommendations and reflexive prompts for health professional educators seeking to engage service user educators in health professional education through the practice of storytelling.

Using qualitative Health Research methods to improve patient and public involvement and engagement in research

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

Patient engagement (or patient and public involvement) in health research is becoming a requirement for many health research funders, yet many researchers have little or no experience in engaging patients as partners as opposed to research subjects. Additionally, many patients have no experience providing input on the research design or acting as a decision-making partner on a research team. Several potential risks exist when patient engagement is done poorly, despite best intentions. Some of these risks are that: (1) patients' involvement is merely tokenism (patients are involved but their suggestions have little influence on how research is conducted); (2) engaged patients do not represent the diversity of people affected by the research; and, (3) research outcomes lack relevance to patients' lives and experiences.Qualitative health research (the collection and systematic analysis of non-quantitative data about peoples' experiences of health or illness and the healthcare system) offers several approaches that can help to mitigate these risks. Several qualitative health research methods, when done well, can help research teams to: (1) accurately incorporate patients' perspectives and experiences into the design and conduct of research; (2) engage diverse patient perspectives; and, (3) treat patients as equal and ongoing partners on the research team.This commentary presents several established qualitative health research methods that are relevant to patient engagement in research. The hope is that this paper will inspire readers to seek more information about qualitative health research, and consider how its established methods may help improve the quality and ethical conduct of patient engagement for health research.

ABSTRACT

Background Research funders in several countries have posited a new vision for research that involves patients and the public as co-applicants for the funding, and as collaborative partners in decision-making at various stages and/or throughout the research process. Patient engagement (or patient and public involvement) in health research is presented as a more democratic approach that leads to research that is relevant to the lives of the people affected by its outcomes. What is missing from the recent proliferation of resources and publications detailing the practical aspects of patient engagement is a recognition of how existing research methods can inform patient engagement initiatives. Qualitative health research, for example, has established methods of collecting and analyzing non-quantitative data about individuals' and communities' lived experiences with health, illness and/or the healthcare system. Included in the paradigm of qualitative health research is participatory health research, which offers approaches to partnering with individuals and communities to design and conduct research that addresses their needs and priorities. Discussion The purpose of this commentary is to explore how qualitative health research methods can inform and support meaningful engagement with patients as partners. Specifically, this paper addresses issues of: rigour (how can patient engagement in research be done well?); representation (are the right patients being engaged?); and, reflexivity (is engagement being done in ways that are meaningful, ethical and equitable?). Various qualitative research methods are presented to increase the rigour found within patient engagement. Approaches to engage more diverse patient perspectives are presented to improve representation beyond the common practice of engaging only one or two patients. Reflexivity, or the practice of identifying and articulating how research processes and outcomes are constructed by the respective personal and professional experiences of researchers and patients, is presented to support the development of authentic, sustainable, equitable and meaningful engagement of patients as partners in health research. Conclusions Researchers will need to engage patients as stakeholders in order to satisfy the overlapping mandate in health policy, care and research for engaging patients as partners in decision-making. This paper presents several suggestions to ground patient engagement approaches in established research designs and methods.

Multiple Researcher Roles in Video-Reflexive Ethnography

Hospital-based video-reflexive ethnography (VRE) is a collaborative visual methodology used by researchers and/or health professionals to understand, interpret, and optimize health professionals' work practices and patients' experiences. For more than a decade, the VRE methodology has spread throughout (research) institutions and hospitals internationally, and VRE has evolved and broadened. Different ways of doing VRE have implications for the role of the researcher. A thorough examination of the consequences for the researcher's position is the central focus of this article. We outline three typical styles of researcher engagement with VRE: clinalyst, affect-as-method, and planned obsolescence. We argue that by examining these different styles of doing VRE research, academic researchers can then critically review and carefully choose which styles of VRE research best meet the needs of their research questions, their field relationships, their disciplinary background, and the expectations of their clinical research collaborators.