IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i7-8p1312-1322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stimulated by insight: Exploration of critical care nurses' experience of research participation in a recovery programme for intensive care survivors

Author

Listed:
  • Lene Lehmkuhl
  • Ingrid Egerod
  • Dorthe Overgaard
  • Morten H. Bestle
  • Janet F. Jensen

Abstract

Aims and objectives To explore critical care nurses' experiences of research participation during a one‐year recovery programme for intensive care survivors. Background Nurse‐led postintensive care follow‐up consultations have emerged to help patients to recover and overcome problems related to critical illness and admission at the intensive care unit (ICU). Previous research exploring post‐ICU follow‐up programmes have shown inconclusive evidence of their effectiveness on patient‐reported outcome measurements, and provider evaluation is scarce. The context of this study is the Recovery and Aftercare in Postintensive care Therapy (RAPIT) trial. Design A qualitative descriptive telephone interview study. Methods Data were collected after completion of the RAPIT trial. Participants (n = 14) were trained intensive care nurses, who delivered the post‐ICU recovery programme, representing nine out of ten sites from the RAPIT trial. Two focus group discussions were used to construct a semistructured interview guide. A thematic data analysis was performed using Braun and Clark's six‐step method. This study conforms to the COREQ Research Reporting Guidelines for qualitative studies. Results Our study indicated that nurses considered participation in research as a positive experience. The main finding “Stimulated by insight” described how nurses' engagement and professional growth was gained by reflection, patient feedback and research competencies acquired in the clinical setting. The research programmes stimulated to new knowledge, broaden their perspectives and enhanced critical reflection of ICU nursing practice. Conclusions The study indicates that nurses developed research competencies and enhanced their job satisfaction by using critical reflection and patient feedback. However, there is still a substantial need for support to strengthen nurses' competencies in collaboration with colleagues, managers and researchers. Relevance to Clinical Practice This study can contribute to the development of recommendations supporting nurses doing research and to optimise implementation of clinical research.

Suggested Citation

  • Lene Lehmkuhl & Ingrid Egerod & Dorthe Overgaard & Morten H. Bestle & Janet F. Jensen, 2020. "Stimulated by insight: Exploration of critical care nurses' experience of research participation in a recovery programme for intensive care survivors," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1312-1322, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1312-1322
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15193
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15193?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bente Elkjaer & Bjarne Wahlgren, 2005. "Organizational Learning and Workplace Learning — Similarities and Differences," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Elena Antonacopoulou & Peter Jarvis & Vibeke Andersen & Bente Elkjaer & Steen Høyrup (ed.), Learning, Working and Living, chapter 2, pages 15-32, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Åsa Engström & Siv Söderberg, 2010. "Critical care nurses’ experiences of follow‐up visits to an ICU," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(19‐20), pages 2925-2932, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1312-1322. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.