Dilemmas in doing insider research in professional education

This article explores the dilemmas I encountered when researching social work education in England as an insider researcher who was simultaneously employed as an educator in the host institution. This was an ethnographic project deploying multiple methods and generating rich case study material which informed the student textbook Becoming a Social Worker the four-year period of the project. First, ethical dilemmas emerged around informed consent and confidentiality when conducting surveys of students and reading their portfolios. Second, professional dilemmas stemmed from the ways in which my roles as a researcher, academic tutor, social worker and former practice educator converged and collided. Third, political dilemmas pertained to the potential for the project to crystallize and convey conflicts among stakeholders in the university and community. Since the majority of research in social work education is conducted by insiders, we have a vital interest in making sense of such complexity

Facilitation skills: the catalyst for increased effectiveness in consultant practice and clinical systems leadership

Consultant practitioner is the pinnacle of the clinical career ladder for all health care disciplines in the United Kingdom. Consultant nurse, midwife and health visitor roles build on the clinical credibility and expertise characteristic of advanced level practice, but also possess expertise in: clinical systems leadership and the facilitation of culture change, learning and development; advanced consultancy approaches, and research and evaluation to prioritise person-centred, safe and effective care across patient pathways. This project aimed to help new and emerging consultants to become more effective in their role through a programme of support to develop their expertise. Emancipatory action research, supported by claims, concerns and issues tool, derived from Stakeholder Evaluation, and other methods (active learning, action learning, collaborative workshops and individual tools e.g. qualitative 360 degree feedback and reflective reviews) comprised the supportive intervention which enabled participants to research their own practice. The programme’s methodology and methods helped participants to: research their own practice; theorise from practice; grow the facilitation skills needed to develop and demonstrate their own effectiveness; foster the effectiveness of others and; transform practice culture. Greater effectiveness in their multiple roles was demonstrated, as was the impact of this on others, services and organisations. The study concludes that the support programme augmented by the methodology, facilitation skills and the 10 principles derived from a concept analysis of work-based learning is central to achieving improved effectiveness and transformation of others, services and organisations. Theoretical insights at collective/community levels also resulted. Key recommendations are identified for commissioners, higher education and research

Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework : theoretical and practical challenges

Background The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it still remains untested and therefore its contribution to the overall development and testing of theory in the field of implementation science is largely unquantified. Discussion This being the case, the paper provides an integrated summary of our conceptual and theoretical thinking so far and introduces a typology (derived from social policy analysis) used to distinguish between the terms conceptual framework, theory and model – important definitional and conceptual issues in trying to refine theoretical and methodological approaches to knowledge translation. Secondly, the paper describes the next phase of our work, in particular concentrating on the conceptual thinking and mapping that has led to the generation of the hypothesis that the PARiHS framework is best utilised as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence (E) and context (C), and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. In the process of refining this next phase of our work, we have had to consider the wider issues around the use of theories to inform and shape our research activity; the ongoing challenges of developing robust and sensitive measures; facilitation as an intervention for getting research into practice; and finally to note how the current debates around evidence into practice are adopting wider notions that fit innovations more generally. Summary The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. In order to expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, we suggest the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. We also recommend further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives

Learning from the early adopters: developing the digital practitioner

This paper explores how Sharpe and Beetham’s Digital Literacies Framework which was derived to model students’ digital literacies, can be applied to lecturers’ digital literacy practices. Data from a small-scale phenomenological study of higher education lecturers who used Web 2.0 in their teaching and learning practices are used to examine if this pyramid model represents their motivations for adopting technology-enhanced learning in their pedagogic practices. The paper argues that whilst Sharpe and Beetham’s model has utility in many regards, these lecturers were mainly motivated by the desire to achieve their pedagogic goals rather than by a desire to become a digital practitioner

Palpitations following regular ibuprofen dosing in a 13-year-old girl: a case report

Abstract Introduction The sensation of palpitations may either be the initial or the only symptom of cardiac arrhythmia. We describe a case of an apparent clear temporal relationship between standard ibuprofen dosing and palpitations. A review of the medical literature revealed this to be, to the best of our knowledge, the first reported case of this type. Case presentation A 13-year-old Caucasian girl initially presented to our clinic with hamstring tendinitis. She was commenced on a medication regimen of paracetamol and ibuprofen. After the third ibuprofen dose, she experienced palpitations. These were associated with lower chest and/or upper abdominal discomfort, and a feeling of being hot and sweaty. Her symptoms ceased upon the cessation of ibuprofen therapy. Conclusion Cardiac arrhythmia is a potentially fatal disorder that may exhibit heart palpitations as its initial (or only) symptom. The prompt recognition of the cause of the symptom can reduce mortality and morbidity associated with any underlying pathological processes. There is a need to investigate cases of recurrent palpitations so as to exclude underlying structural cardiac pathology and/or abnormal cardiac rhythm.</p

Facilitating implementation of research evidence (FIRE): A randomised controlled trial and process evaluation of two models of facilitation informed by the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework

Background: The PARIHS framework proposes that successful implementation of research evidence results from the complex interplay between the evidence to be implemented, the context of implementation and the facilitation processes employed. Facilitation is defined as a role (the facilitator) and a process (facilitation strategies/methods). Empirical evidence comparing different facilitation approaches is limited; this paper reports a trial of two different types of facilitation represented in the PARIHS framework. Methods: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with embedded process evaluation was undertaken in 24 long-term nursing care settings in four European countries. In each country, sites were randomly allocated to standard dissemination of urinary incontinence guideline recommendations and one of two types of external-internal facilitation, labelled Type A and B. Type A facilitation was a less resource intensive approach, underpinned by improvement methodology; Type B was a more intensive, emancipatory model of facilitation, informed by critical social science. The primary outcome was percentage documented compliance with guideline recommendations. Process evaluation was framed by realist methodology and involved quantitative and qualitative data collection from multiple sources. Findings: Quantitative data were obtained from reviews of 2313 records. Qualitative data included over 332 hours of observations of care; 39 hours observation of facilitation activity; 471 staff interviews; 174 resident interviews; 120 next of kin/carer interviews; and 125 stakeholder interviews. There were no significant differences in the primary outcome between study arms and all study arms improved over time. Process data revealed three core mechanisms that influenced the trajectory of the facilitation intervention: alignment of the facilitation approach to the needs and expectations of the internal facilitator and colleagues; engagement of internal facilitators and staff in attitude and action; and learning over time. Data from external facilitators demonstrated that the facilitation interventions did not work as planned, issues were cumulative and maintenance of fidelity was problematic. Implications for D&I Research: Evaluating an intervention - in this case facilitation - that is fluid and dynamic within the methodology of a randomised controlled trial is complex and challenging. For future studies, we suggest a theoretical approach to fidelity, with a focus on mechanisms, as opposed to dose and intensity of the intervention

FIRE (facilitating implementation of research evidence) : a study protocol

Research evidence underpins best practice, but is not always used in healthcare. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework suggests that the nature of evidence, the context in which it is used, and whether those trying to use evidence are helped (or facilitated) affect the use of evidence. Urinary incontinence has a major effect on quality of life of older people, has a high prevalence, and is a key priority within European health and social care policy. Improving continence care has the potential to improve the quality of life for older people and reduce the costs associated with providing incontinence aids

Developing the practice context to enable more effective pain management with older people: an action research approach

Background\ud \ud This paper, which draws upon an Emancipatory Action Research (EAR) approach, unearths how the complexities of context influence the realities of nursing practice. While the intention of the project was to identify and change factors in the practice context that inhibit effective person-centred pain management practices with older people (65 years or older), reflective critical engagement with the findings identified that enhancing pain management practices with older people was dependent on cultural change in the unit as a whole. \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud An EAR approach was utilised. The project was undertaken in a surgical unit that conducted complex abdominal surgery. Eighty-five percent (n = 48) of nursing staff participated in the two-year project (05/NIR02/107). Data were obtained through the use of facilitated critical reflection with nursing staff. \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Three key themes (psychological safety, leadership, oppression) and four subthemes (power, horizontal violence, distorted perceptions, autonomy) were found to influence the way in which effective nursing practice was realised. Within the theme of 'context,' effective leadership and the creation of a psychologically safe environment were key elements in the enhancement of all aspects of nursing practice. \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Whilst other research has identified the importance of 'practice context' and models and frameworks are emerging to address this issue, the theme of 'psychological safety' has been given little attention in the knowledge translation/implementation literature. Within the principles of EAR, facilitated reflective sessions were found to create 'psychologically safe spaces' that supported practitioners to develop effective person-centred nursing practices in complex clinical environments

A realist process evaluation within the Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE) cluster randomised controlled international trial: An exemplar

Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11598502Background Facilitation is a promising implementation intervention, which requires theory informed evaluation. This paper presents an exemplar of a multi-country realist process evaluation that was embedded in the first international randomised controlled trial evaluating two types of facilitation for implementing urinary continence care recommendations. We aimed to uncover what worked (and did not work), for whom, how, why and in what circumstances during the process of implementing the facilitation interventions in practice. Methods This realist process evaluation included theory formulation, theory testing and refining. Data were collected in 24 care home sites across four European countries. Data were collected over four time-points using multiple qualitative methods: observation (372 hours), interviews with staff (n=357), residents (n=152), next of kin (n=109) other stakeholders (n=128), supplemented by facilitator activity logs. A combined inductive and deductive data analysis process focused on realist theory refinement and testing. Results The content and approach of the two facilitation programmes prompted variable opportunities to align and realign support with the needs and expectations of facilitators and homes. This influenced their level of confidence in fulfilling the facilitator role, and ability to deliver the intervention as planned. The success of intervention implementation was largely dependent on whether sites prioritised their involvement in both the study and the facilitation programme. In contexts where the study was prioritised (including release of resources) and where managers and staff support was sustained, this prompted collective engagement (as an attitude and action). Internal facilitators’ (IF) personal characteristics and abilities, including personal and formal authority, in combination with a supportive environment prompted by managers triggered the potential for learning over time. Learning over time resulted in a sense of confidence and personal growth, and enactment of the facilitation role, which resulted in practice changes. Conclusion The scale and multi-country nature of this study provided a novel context to conduct one of the few trial embedded realist informed process evaluations. In addition to providing an explanatory account of implementation processes, a conceptual platform for future facilitation research is presented. Finally a realist informed process evaluation framework is outlined, which could inform future research of this nature.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 223646. The funder had no role in designing, conducting, or interpreting study findings.https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles13pubpub13