Dataset Information

A mixed-methods study of challenges and benefits of clinical academic careers for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The clinical academic trajectory for doctors and dentists is well-established, with research embedded in their career development. Recent years have also seen a burgeoning interest and push for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals (NMAHPs) to pursue a clinical academic career. However, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) 10-year review suggested that there may be problems with progression post Master's degree level for this group, with nurses and midwives receiving less NIHR funding than allied health professionals. This study responds to these concerns, tracking the progression and exploring experiences of NMAHPs in the East Midlands region of England.

Design

An online survey and in-depth interviews were used to capture a wide range of experiences.

Participants

67 NMAHPs who were pursuing a clinical academic career were surveyed, supplemented by 16 semi-structured in-depth interviews.

Results

Three themes emerged during data analysis: Embarking on a clinical academic career, overcoming barriers and benefits.

Conclusions

NMAHPs are motivated to pursue a clinical academic career by a drive to improve services for the benefit of patients and the National Health Service more widely, as well as for personal development and career progression. People working in these roles have opportunities to explore possible solutions to issues that they encounter in their clinical role through academic study. Findings reveal benefits emanating from the individual level through to (inter)national levels, therefore academic study should be encouraged and supported. However, investment is needed to establish more clinical academic roles to enable NMAHPs to continue to use their experience and expertise post-PhD, otherwise the full extent of their value will not be recognised.

SUBMITTER: Trusson D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6797317 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A mixed-methods study of challenges and benefits of clinical academic careers for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.

Trusson Diane D Rowley Emma E Bramley Louise L

BMJ open 20191007 10

<h4>Objectives</h4>The clinical academic trajectory for doctors and dentists is well-established, with research embedded in their career development. Recent years have also seen a burgeoning interest and push for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals (NMAHPs) to pursue a clinical academic career. However, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) 10-year review suggested that there may be problems with progression post Master's degree level for this group, with nurses and midw ...[more]

PMID: 31594886

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite the myriad benefits of research to patients, professionals, and organisations, fewer than 0.1% of the Allied Health Professions workforce are employed in clinical academic roles. Identified barriers include a lack of role modelling, management support, funding, and availability of clinical academic roles. Research capacity building is critical to improving Allied Health Professional research capability. The aim of this evaluation was to explore the current research capacity and culture of Allied Health Professionals to inform future tailored research capacity building strategies at a local level.MethodsA mixed methods evaluation of research capacity and culture was conducted within the Allied Health Professions department of a large National Health Service Foundation Trust using an online research capacity and culture questionnaire, followed by focus groups. Staff were recruited using a purposive method with the questionnaire and subsequent focus groups completed between July and September 2020. Data from the questionnaire was analysed using simple descriptive statistics and after inductive coding, focus group data was analysed thematically.Results93 out of 278 staff completed the questionnaire and 60 staff members attended seven focus groups. The research capacity and culture survey reported the department's key strength as promoting clinical practice based on evidence (median=8, range=6-9). A key reported weakness of the department was insufficient resources to support staff research training (med=4, 3-6). Respondents considered themselves most skilled in finding relevant literature (med=6, 5-8) and least skilled at securing research funding (med=1, 1-2). Greater than half of the respondents (n=50) reported not currently being involved with research. Five themes were identified from the focus groups: empowerment; building research infrastructure; fostering research skills; access for all; and positive research culture.ConclusionsAllied Health Professionals recognise the benefits of research at teams and departmental level, but marginally at an individual level. Local research capacity building strategies should aim to address the role, responsibilities and barriers to Allied Health Profession research development at an individual level. To ensure all staff can engage, research infrastructure and empowerment are essential.

Project description:BackgroundMentorship influences career planning, academic productivity, professional satisfaction, and most notably, the pursuit of academic medicine careers. Little is known about the role of mentoring in recruiting Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino residents into academia. The objective of this study was to assess the influence of mentoring on academic medicine career choice among a cohort of racially and ethnically diverse residents.MethodsA strategic convenience sample of U.S. residents attending national professional conferences between March and July 2010; residents completed a quantitative survey and a subset participated in focus groups.ResultsOf the 250 residents, 183 (73%) completed surveys and 48 participated in focus groups. Thirty-eight percent of residents were white, 31% Black/African American, 17% Asian/other, and 14% Hispanic/Latino. Most respondents (93%) reported that mentorship was important for entering academia, and 70% reported having sufficient mentorship to pursue academic careers. Three themes about mentorship emerged from focus groups: (1) qualities of successful mentorship models; (2) perceived benefits of mentorship; and (3) the value of racial/ethnic and gender concordance. Residents preferred mentors they selected rather than ones assigned to them, and expressed concern about faculty using checklists. Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and female residents described actively seeking out mentors of the same race/ethnicity and gender, but expressed difficulty finding such mentors. Lack of racial/ethnic concordance was perceived as an obstacle for minority mentees, requiring explanation of the context and nuances of their perspectives and situations to non-minority mentors.ConclusionsThe majority of residents in this study reported having access to mentors. However, data show that the lack of diverse faculty mentors may impede diverse residents' satisfaction and benefit from mentorship relationships compared to white residents. These findings are important for residency programs striving to enhance resident mentorship and for institutions working to diversify their faculty and staff to achieve institutional excellence.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare professionals are recommended to use evidence-based practice (EBP) principles to update and improve clinical practice. Well-designed educational initiatives, together with practice and feedback opportunities can improve individuals' EBP knowledge, skills and attitudes.MethodsA concurrent mixed methods assessment was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of four monthly workshops on allied health professionals' knowledge, skills, self-efficacy and behaviour. In between workshops, professionals were encouraged to practice and integrate EBP learnings with colleagues in their workplace. Participants completed three pre and post intervention assessments: Evidence-based Practice Confidence Scale; adapted Fresno test; and an adapted EBP Implementation Scale. A purpose designed satisfaction questionnaire was completed immediately after the educational intervention and follow up focus groups were conducted after 3 months. Mean change in assessment data was quantitatively assessed and comments from the clinician satisfaction questionnaire and focus groups were thematically analysed and interpreted together with quantitative data using the Classification Rubric for EBP Assessment tools in Education (CREATE).ResultsSixteen allied health professionals participated in the EBP workshops and completed all baseline and post intervention assessments. Seven clinicians participated in follow up focus groups. All clinicians reported a positive reaction to the learning experience, preferring short monthly workshops to a full day session. They self-reported improvements in self-efficacy (mean change 15 p < 0.001) and implementing EBP behaviours (mean change 7, p < 0.001) from pre- to post-intervention. Although the positive change in EBP knowledge measured by the adapted Fresno test was not statistically significant (mean change 10, p = 0.21), clinicians described examples of improved knowledge and skills across all five key steps of EBP during the focus groups. A further, post hoc analysis of individual questions in the two self-reported scales indicated consistent improvement across key EBP knowledge and skills.ConclusionsA tailored small group EBP education intervention can enhance AHPs' self-efficacy to develop answerable questions, search the literature, critically appraise, apply and evaluate research evidence. Through practicing these behaviours and sharing new learning with their peers, allied health professionals can enhance their capability and motivation to use research evidence to potentially improve clinical practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The East Africa Preterm Birth Initiative-Rwanda began a cluster randomized controlled trial of group antenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) in Rwanda in 2017. That trial will report its primary outcome, gestational length at birth, after data collection concludes in 2019. This nested study includes providers of ANC and/or PNC at the 18 health centers randomized to provide the group model of ANC/PNC and the 18 health centers randomized to continue providing ANC/PNC in the traditional, individual visit model. The objective of this study is to understand the experiences of providers of group ANC/PNC and compare their job satisfaction and perceived stress with individual ANC/PNC providers. METHODS:We collected both quantitative and qualitative data from providers (nurses and midwives) who were recruited by health center directors to participate as group ANC and PNC facilitators at intervention sites and from a similar number of providers of standard ANC and PNC at control sites. Quantitative data was collected with questionnaires administered at baseline and approximately 9 months later (follow up). Qualitative data was collected in 3 focus groups of group ANC/PNC providers conducted one year after group care began. RESULTS:Eighty-six percent of nurses and midwives surveyed who implemented group ANC and PNC reported that they prefer group care to the traditional individual model of ANC and PNC. Perceived stress levels and job satisfaction results were similar between groups. Mixed focus group discussions among both nurses and midwives experienced in group ANC and PNC suggest that the group model of care has advantages for both service beneficiaries and providers. When providers described implementation challenges, their peers in the focus groups offered them suggestions to cope and improve service delivery. DISCUSSION:These results are consistent with studies of providers of group ANC and PNC in other LMIC contexts with respect to the perceived benefits of group care. This study adds new insights into the ways peer providers can help one another solve implementation problems. When given the opportunity to meet as a group, these study participants offered one another peer support and shared knowledge about best practices for successful implementation of group ANC/PNC. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03154177.

Project description:BackgroundFemale genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is a complex and deeply rooted sociocultural custom that is innately entrenched in the lives of those who continue its practice despite the physical and psychological dangers it perpetrates. FGM/C is considered a significant independent risk factor for adverse maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy and childbirth. Several studies in high-income countries have explored the experiences and needs of women with FGM/C as well as the knowledge of the health professionals, particularly midwives and nurses, who care for them. However, to date, no studies have evaluated the implementation of education for health professionals in high-income countries to meet the specific needs of women with FGM/C.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore the impact of an FGM/C education program for midwives and nurses as informed by the experiences of women with FGM/C accessing maternity, gynecological, and sexual health services in South Australia.MethodsThis study will adopt a three-phase, exploratory sequential mixed methods design. Phase 1 will involve the exploration of women with FGM/C views and experiences accessing maternity and gynecological (including sexual health) services in South Australia. The findings from phase 1 will inform phase 2: the development of an educational program for midwives and nurses on the health and cultural needs of women with FGM/C. Phase 3 will involve the evaluation of the program by measuring midwives' and nurses' changes in knowledge, attitude, and practice immediately before and after the education as well as 4 months after completing the program. Phase 1 of this study has been approved by the Women's and Children's Health Network human research ethics committee (ID number 2021/HRE00156) and the University of South Australia human research ethics committee (ID number 204096).ResultsPhase 1 will commence in August 2021, with the interpretation of findings being undertaken by November 2021. Phase 2 will be developed and facilitated by February 2022, and the final phase of this study will begin in March 2022. This study is expected to be completed by February 2023.ConclusionsThe findings of this research will provide insight into the development and evaluation of education programs for midwives and nurses that includes collaboration with women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds to address the specific cultural and health needs of communities.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/32911.

Dataset Information

A mixed-methods study of challenges and benefits of clinical academic careers for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.

Objectives

Design

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A mixed-methods study of challenges and benefits of clinical academic careers for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure