Institute of Nursing and Health Research, School of Nursing, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, UK.
Southern Health and Social Care Trust, Rosedale, Gilford, UK.
Res Nurs Health. 2021 Jun;44(3):534-547. doi: 10.1002/nur.22128. Epub 2021 Mar 28.
The engagement of frontline practitioners in the production of research-derived knowledge is often advocated. Doing so can address perceived gaps between what is known from research and what happens in clinical practice. Engagement practices span a continuum, from co-production approaches underpinned by principles of equality and power sharing to those which can minimalize practitioners' contributions to the knowledge production process. We observed a conceptual gap in published healthcare literature that labels or defines practitioners' meaningful contribution to the research process. We, therefore, aimed to develop the concept of "Researcher Practitioner Engagement" in the context of academically initiated healthcare research in the professions of nursing, midwifery, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and speech and language therapy. Guided by Schwartz-Barcott et al.'s hybrid model of concept development, published examples were analyzed to establish the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of this type of engagement. Academic researchers (n = 17) and frontline practitioners (n = 8) with relevant experience took part in online focus groups to confirm, eliminate, or elaborate on these proposed concept components. Combined analysis of theoretical and focus group data showed that the essence of this form of engagement is that practitioners' clinical knowledge is valued from a study's formative stages. The practitioner's clinical perspectives inform problem-solving and decision-making in study activities and enhance the professional and practice relevance of a study. The conceptual model produced from the study findings forms a basis to guide engagement practices, future concept testing, and empirical evaluation of engagement practices.
倡导让一线从业者参与研究衍生知识的产出。这样做可以解决研究中已知内容与临床实践之间的差距问题。参与实践涵盖了一个连续体，从基于平等和权力共享原则的共同生产方法到那些可以将从业者对知识生产过程的贡献最小化的方法。我们在已发表的医疗保健文献中观察到一个概念上的差距，即标签或定义从业者对研究过程的有意义贡献。因此，我们旨在根据护理、助产、职业治疗、物理治疗和言语和语言治疗等专业领域的学术发起的医疗保健研究，发展“研究人员-从业者参与”的概念。在 Schwartz-Barcott 等人的混合概念发展模型的指导下，分析已发表的例子，以确定这种类型的参与的属性、前提和结果。具有相关经验的学术研究人员（n=17）和一线从业者（n=8）参加了在线焦点小组，以确认、消除或详细说明这些拟议的概念组成部分。理论和焦点小组数据的综合分析表明，这种参与形式的本质是从研究的形成阶段就重视从业者的临床知识。从业者的临床观点为研究活动中的问题解决和决策提供信息，并增强研究的专业性和实践相关性。从研究结果中得出的概念模型为指导参与实践、未来概念测试和参与实践的实证评估提供了基础。
