Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, London, UK.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Apr;27(4):321-330. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007226. Epub 2017 Dec 20.
The ability to capture the complexities of healthcare practices and the quick turnaround of findings make rapid ethnographies appealing to the healthcare sector, where changing organisational climates and priorities require actionable findings at strategic time points. Despite methodological advancement, there continue to be challenges in the implementation of rapid ethnographies concerning sampling, the interpretation of findings and management of field research. The purpose of this review was to explore the benefits and challenges of using rapid ethnographies to inform healthcare organisation and delivery and identify areas that require improvement.
This was a systematic review of the literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess the quality of the articles. We developed the search strategy using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Settingframework and searched for peer-reviewed articles in MEDLINE, CINAHL PLUS, Web of Science and ProQuest Central. We included articles that reported findings from rapid ethnographies in healthcare contexts or addressing issues related to health service use.
26 articles were included in the review. We found an increase in the use of rapid ethnographies in the last 2‰years. We found variability in terminology and developed a typology to clarify conceptual differences. The studies generated findings that could be used to inform policy and practice. The main limitations of the studies were: the poor quality of reporting of study designs, mainly data analysis methods, and lack of reflexivity.
Rapid ethnographies have the potential to generate findings that can inform changes in healthcare practices in a timely manner, but greater attention needs to be paid to the reflexive interpretation of findings and the description of research methods.
CRD42017065874.
快速民族志能够捕捉医疗实践的复杂性和发现的快速变化,因此吸引了医疗保健行业的关注,在医疗保健行业中,不断变化的组织环境和优先事项需要在战略时间点提供可行的发现。尽管方法学有所进步,但在实施快速民族志时,仍然存在一些挑战,例如抽样、发现的解释和现场研究管理。本研究旨在探讨使用快速民族志为医疗保健组织和服务提供信息的益处和挑战,并确定需要改进的领域。
这是一项系统综述,使用了《系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目》的指导原则。我们使用混合方法评估工具来评估文章的质量。我们使用人口、干预、比较、结果、环境框架制定了搜索策略,并在 MEDLINE、CINAHL PLUS、Web of Science 和 ProQuest Central 中搜索同行评议文章。我们纳入了在医疗保健背景下报告快速民族志发现或解决与卫生服务使用相关问题的文章。
共纳入 26 篇文章。我们发现,在过去的 20 年中,快速民族志的使用有所增加。我们发现术语存在差异,并开发了一个分类法来澄清概念上的差异。这些研究产生的发现可以用于为政策和实践提供信息。研究的主要局限性是:研究设计的报告质量较差,主要是数据分析方法,以及缺乏反思性。
快速民族志有可能及时生成能够为医疗保健实践的变化提供信息的发现,但需要更加关注发现的反思性解释和研究方法的描述。
CRD42017065874。