1,721,217 research outputs found
Annex E: Stirling Review and update: qualitative studies. Analysis by Professor Catherine Pope, Southampton University
No full textReivew: exploring the effectiveness of action research as a tool for organisational change in health care
No full text
Resisting evidence: the study of evidence-based medicine as a contemporary social movement
No full textEvidence-based medicine (EBM) emerged relatively recently to describe the explicit process of applying research evidence to medical practice. The movement was high profile, yet not overly successful: many clinicians do not use up-to-date evidence in their everyday work. This article shows how a social movement perspective can be used to analyse the emergence of EBM and shed light on power struggles between segments of the medical profession. It draws on Blumer’s (1951) essay on social movements to demonstrate the continued salience of this approach. The article also presents empirical data from a qualitative study of English and American surgeons to illustrate how EBM provides a focus for segmental conflict within medical practice between ‘art’ and ‘science’, ‘practice’ and ‘evidence’. Together these data and the social movements perspective provide insight into the dynamics of this struggle and help to explain why clinicians continue to resist EBM
Making health care responsive to the needs of older people
No full textThis commentary highlights the importance of health system responsiveness to older people living with complex health needs. Age-related changes and associated morbidity can present barriers to identifying an individual’s health needs, expectations, values and preferences, and so sufficient time, skill and resource is required to inform the development of a tailored plan for each individual. A focus on responsiveness moves thinking beyond the responsibilities of the individual clinician in the single encounter, and allows us to identify elements of the wider system that may constrain how well the clinician is able to respond. Setting the goal of responsive health care requires us to assess the suitability of wider health system features and processes for meeting the diverse needs of individual people throughout their journey, and the extent to which the system can adapt dynamically as needs change. Standardised approaches to care prescribed across organisations (such as time-based targets or routinised approaches to inpatient nursing care) are likely to result in low responsiveness as individual complexity grows, disadvantaging patients with needs that do not fit the prescribed approach. Responsiveness is high when individual practitioners and clinical teams have the resources, decentralised authority, flexibility and autonomy to provide the care required. Building a more responsive health system requires a greater understanding of how these conditions can be achieved
Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines
No full textBackground: GPs' adherence to clinical practice guidelines is variable. Barriers to guideline implementation have been identified but qualitative studies have not been synthesised to explore what underpins these attitudes.Aim: To explore and synthesise qualitative research on GPs' attitudes to and experiences with clinical practice guidelines.Design of study: Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.Method: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Social Science Citation Index, and Science Citation Index were used as data sources, and independent data extraction was carried out. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Initial thematic analysis was conducted, followed by interpretative synthesis.Results: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Five were excluded following quality appraisal. Twelve papers were synthesised which reported research in the UK, US, Canada, and the Netherlands, and covered different clinical guideline topics. Six themes were identified: questioning the guidelines, GPs' experience, preserving the doctor-patient relationship, professional responsibility, practical issues, and guideline format. Comparative analysis and synthesis revealed that GPs' reasons for not following guidelines differed according to whether the guideline in question was prescriptive, in that it encouraged a certain type of behaviour or treatment, or proscriptive, in that it discouraged certain treatments or behaviours.Conclusion: Previous analyses of guidelines have focused on professional attitudes and organisational barriers to adherence. This synthesis suggests that the purpose of the guideline, whether its aims are prescriptive or proscriptive, may influence if and how guidelines are received and implemented
Could the Web be a temporary glitch?
No full textIn this paper we begin with the assertion that Web Science is the study of the technologies and policies that support the co-construction of a linked online environment by a networked society, and we end by questioning whether the Web that we currently enjoy is a permanent and fundamental phenomenon, or merely a fashionable popular enthusiasm for a particular kind of information sharing
Why managing sciatica is difficult: patients’ experiences of an NHS sciatica pathway. A qualitative, interpretative study
No full textObjectives Amid a political agenda for integrated, high-value care, the UK is implementing its Low Back and Radicular Pain Pathway. To align care with need, it is imperative to understand the patients’ perspective. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to explore how people experience being managed for sciatica within an National Health Service (NHS) pathway.Design Qualitative interpretative study.Setting Musculoskeletal Service in an NHS, Primary Care Trust, UK.Participants The sample comprised 14 people aged ≥18 years with a clinical presentation of sciatica, who were currently under the care of a specialist physiotherapist (the specialist spinal triage practitioner), had undergone investigations (MRI) and received the results within the past 6 weeks. People were excluded if they had previously undergone spinal surgery or if the suspected cause of symptoms was cauda equina syndrome or sinister pathology. Participants were sampled purposively for variation in age and gender. Data were collected using individual semi-structured interviews (duration: 38–117 min; median: 82.6 min), which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed thematically.Results A series of problems with the local pathway (insufficient transparency and information; clinician-led decisions; standardised management; restricted access to specialist care; and a lack of collaboration between services) made it difficult for patients to access the management they perceived necessary. Patients were therefore required to be independent and proactive or have agency. This was, however, difficult to achieve (due to the impact of sciatica and because patients lacked the necessary skills, funds and support) and together with the pathway issues, this negated patients’ capability to manage sciatica.Conclusions This novel paper explores how patients experience the process of being managed within a sciatica pathway. While highlighting the need to align with recommended best practice, it shows the need to be more person-centred and to support and empower patient agency.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov reference (UOS-2307-CR); Pre-results
Infrastructure challenges to doing health research “where populations with the most disease live” in Covid times—a response to Rai et al. (2021)
Full text linkBackground: The failure of randomised controlled trials to adequately reflect areas of highest health need have been repeatedly highlighted. This has implications for the validity and generalisability of findings, for equity and efficiency, but also for research capacity-building. Rai et al. (BMC Med Res Method: ol 21:80, 2021) recently argued that the poor alignment between UK clinical research activity (specifically multi-centre RCTs) and local prevalence of disease was, in part, the outcome of behaviour and decision-making by Chief Investigators involved in trial research. They argued that a shift in research culture was needed. Following our recent multi-site mixed methods evaluative study about NHS 111 online we identify some of the additional structural barriers to delivering health research “where populations with the most disease live”, accounting for the Covid-19 disruption to processes and delivery. Methods: The NHS 111 study used a mixed-method research design, including interviews with healthcare staff and stakeholders within the primary, urgent and emergency health care system, and a survey of users and potential users of the NHS 111 online service. This paper draws on data collated by the research team during site identification and selection, as we followed an action research cycle of planning, action, observation and refection. The process results were discussed among the authors, and grouped into the two themes presented. Results: We approached 22 primary and secondary care sites across England, successfully recruiting half of these. Time from initial approach to first participant recruitment in successful sites ranged from one to ten months. This paper describes frontline bureaucratic barriers to research delivery and recruitment in the local Clinical Research Network system and secondary care sites carrying large research portfolios, alongside the adaptive practices of research practitioners that mitigate these. Conclusions: This paper augments the recommendations of Rai et al., describing delays encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic, and suggesting in addition to cultural change, it may be additionally important to dismantle infrastructural barriers and improve support to research teams so they can conduct health research “where populations with the most disease live”.<br/
The role of clinician emotion in clinical reasoning: balancing the analytical process
No full textIntroductionThis review paper identifies and describes the role of clinicians' memory, emotions and physical responses in clinical reasoning processes. Clinical reasoning is complex and multi-factorial and key models of clinical reasoning within musculoskeletal physiotherapy are discussed, highlighting the omission of emotion and subsequent physical responses and how these can impact upon a clinician when making a decision.DiscussionIt is proposed that clinicians should consider the emotions associated with decision-making, especially when there is concern surrounding a presentation. Reflecting on practice in the clinical environment and subsequently applying this to a patient presentation should involve some acknowledgement of clinicians' physical responses, emotions and how they may play a part in any decision made. Presenting intuition and gut-feeling as separate reasoning methods and how these processes co-exist with other more accepted reasoning such as hypothetico-deductive is also discussed.ConclusionMusculoskeletal physiotherapy should consider the elements of feelings, emotions and physical responses when applying reflective practice principles. Furthermore, clinicians dealing with difficult and challenging presentations should look at the emotional as well as the analytical experience when justifying decisions and learning from practice
- …
