Whitley Gregory Adam, Munro Scott, Hemingway Pippa, Law Graham Richard, Siriwardena Aloysius Niroshan, Cooke Debbie, Quinn Tom
University of Lincoln ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2586-6815.
University of Surrey; South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0228-4102.
Br Paramed J. 2020 Dec 1;5(3):44-51. doi: 10.29045/14784726.2020.12.5.3.44.
Healthcare is becoming increasingly complex. The pre-hospital setting is no exception, especially when considering the unpredictable environment. To address complex clinical problems and improve quality of care for patients, researchers need to use innovative methods to create the necessary depth and breadth of knowledge. Quantitative approaches such as randomised controlled trials and observational (e.g. cross-sectional, case control, cohort) methods, along with qualitative approaches including interviews, focus groups and ethnography, have traditionally been used independently to gain understanding of clinical problems and how to address these. Both approaches, however, have drawbacks: quantitative methods focus on objective, numerical data and provide limited understanding of context, whereas qualitative methods explore more subjective aspects and provide perspective, but can be harder to demonstrate rigour. We argue that mixed methods research, where quantitative and qualitative methods are integrated, is an ideal solution to comprehensively understand complex clinical problems in the pre-hospital setting. The aim of this article is to discuss mixed methods in the field of pre-hospital research, highlight its strengths and limitations and provide examples. This article is tailored to clinicians and early career researchers and covers the basic aspects of mixed methods research. We conclude that mixed methods is a useful research design to help develop our understanding of complex clinical problems in the pre-hospital setting.
医疗保健正变得日益复杂。院前环境也不例外,尤其是考虑到其不可预测的环境时。为了解决复杂的临床问题并提高患者护理质量,研究人员需要采用创新方法来创造必要的知识深度和广度。传统上,诸如随机对照试验和观察性(如横断面研究、病例对照研究、队列研究)方法等定量方法,以及包括访谈、焦点小组和人种志等定性方法,一直是独立使用以了解临床问题及如何解决这些问题的。然而,这两种方法都有缺点:定量方法侧重于客观的数值数据,对背景的理解有限,而定性方法则探索更主观的方面并提供观点,但可能更难证明其严谨性。我们认为,将定量和定性方法相结合的混合方法研究,是全面理解院前环境中复杂临床问题的理想解决方案。本文旨在讨论院前研究领域中的混合方法,突出其优势和局限性并提供实例。本文是为临床医生和早期职业研究人员量身定制的,涵盖了混合方法研究的基本方面。我们得出结论,混合方法是一种有用的研究设计,有助于增进我们对院前环境中复杂临床问题的理解。