A research internship scheme for nurses and its wider implications for clinical managers.

There is growing evidence that clinical research activity is linked to better patient outcomes and that staff involvement in research is linked to enhanced morale and retention. Clinical managers have a pivotal role in supporting staff to engage with research, but they are not always given the means to do so and are not always aware of the benefits. In 2021 a research internship scheme was set up as a collaboration between two London NHS trusts and a university, enabling nurses and midwives to undergo training and undertake a range of research activities. Some participants experienced challenges in fitting internship activities around clinical duties despite the fact that the scheme was planned to give them protected time. This article describes the scheme, reports the findings of its evaluation at one of the two trusts, and discusses its implications for clinical managers in terms of how they can be supported to contribute to the development of a research culture.

Research delivery secondments: A scoping review.

AIM: To explore and summarise published literature with regards to secondments to clinical research and to identify the gaps in research to inform further work. DESIGN: Systematic scoping review. METHOD: A scoping review was undertaken in accordance with the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence and Research framework. Databases searched included CINAHL, PubMed, Medline and Embase. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied by two independent reviewers. Two reviewers independently retrieved full-text studies for inclusion and applied the framework as a tool for synthesising Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence and Research recommendations. RESULTS: Six papers and one abstract published between 2003 and 2018 were included. All secondees (n = 34) were released from NHS posts, with secondments (where specified) ranging in duration from 0.25 to 2 years and for 40%-100% of their working hours. All seven papers reported benefits for personal and professional development, predominantly in the form of personal reflections. Few described involvement with research delivery teams. CONCLUSION: Published initiatives vary in nature and lack standardised reporting and measurement of impact. Further research is required to identify benefits at a departmental or organisational level, the facilitators for setting up secondments and the application of knowledge gained from secondment opportunities. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: Undertaking a research secondment is reported to offer professional and personal benefit for clinical staff. Research secondments are one way in which a research culture can practically be embedded within clinical settings. IMPACT: This scoping review identified a lack of published empirical research seeking to understand research secondments as a tool to enhance research and evidence engagement. Although there is a suggestion that secondments could positively impact staff retention, there is limited evidence about the benefit for the organisation or for patient care. These findings have implications for staff, managers and their organisations. REPORTING METHOD: The PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used to guide reporting. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This was not relevant to the research design.

A novel research competency framework for clinical research nurses and midwives.

BACKGROUND: Clinical research nurses and midwives (CRN/Ms) are highly specialised registered nurses. They combine their clinical nursing expertise with research knowledge and skills to aid in the delivery of rigorous, high-quality clinical research to improve health outcomes, the research participant's experience and treatment pathways ( Beer et al 2022 ). However, there is evidence that the transition into a CRN/M role is challenging for registered nurses. AIM: To discuss the development of a competency framework for CRN/Ms. DISCUSSION: The authors identified a gap in their organisation for standards that would support the development of CRN/Ms new to the role. The standards needed to be clear and accessible to use while encompassing the breadth of scope of CRN/Ms' practice. The authors used a systematic and inclusive process drawing on Benner's ( 1984 ) theory of competence development to develop a suitable framework. Stakeholders engaged in its development included research participants, inclusion agents and CRN/Ms. CONCLUSION: The project identified 15 elements that are core to the CRN/M role and the knowledge, skills and behaviours associated with it. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A large NHS trust has implemented the framework. It is also being shown to national and regional networks. Evaluation is under way.

The organization and impacts of clinical research delivery workforce redeployment during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative case study of one research-intensive acute hospital trust.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has tested healthcare and research systems around the world, forcing the large-scale reorganization of hospitals, research infrastructure and resources. The United Kingdom has been singled out for the speed and scale of its research response. The efficiency of the United Kingdom's research mobilization was in large part predicated on the pre-existing embeddedness of the clinical research system within the National Health Service (NHS), a public, free-at-point-of-delivery healthcare system. In this paper we discuss the redeployment of the clinical research workforce to support the pandemic clinical services, detailing the process of organizing this redeployment, as well as the impacts redeployment has had on both staff and research delivery at one research-intensive acute NHS trust in London. METHODS: A social science case study of one large research-active NHS trust drawing on data from an online questionnaire; participant observation of key research planning meetings; semi-structured interviews with staff involved in research; and document analysis of emails and official national and trust communications. RESULTS: We found that at our case-study hospital trust, the research workforce was a resource that was effectively redeployed as part of the pandemic response. Research delivery workers were redeployed to clinical roles, to COVID-related research and to work maintaining the research system during the redeployment itself. Redeployed research workers faced some difficulties with technology and communication, but many had a positive experience and saw the redeployment as a significant and valuable moment in their career. CONCLUSIONS: This study explicates the role of the research delivery workforce for the United Kingdom's COVID response. Redeployed research workers facilitated the emergency response by delivering significant amounts of patient care. The public also benefited from having a well-developed research infrastructure in place that was able to flexibly respond to a novel virus. Many research workers feel that the NHS should provide more support for this distinctive workforce.

The changing paradigm of research delivery during a pandemic - a reflective account.

BACKGROUND: As clinical pressures evolved amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of research activity came to the forefront of health and care service requirements. AIM: To illustrate through reflection the experiences of clinical research teams based in the UK during the pandemic. DISCUSSION: The article describes operational experiences in different settings and reflects on important themes and implications for future practice. The authors use a reflective model to share perspectives of leading research delivery roles in geographically and organisationally different settings. A patient's perspective was included from the outset of the reflective process. Delegates at an interactive masterclass conference in April 2021 also contributed their experiences. Seven themes characterise the research teams' response to the pandemic: prioritising, team-building, protection, limitation of autonomy, reduced bureaucracy, collaboration and transformation of process. Balance through compassionate leadership underpinned by ethically grounded decision-making was a theme throughout. CONCLUSION: Implicitly held, tacit knowledge progressed to explicit knowledge, formalising the research teams' responses to the pandemic partly into codified learning. The authors characterise the experience as an 'operational balancing act', whereby significant innovations were integrated into working practices and research delivery. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The pandemic demonstrated what research progress is possible when all resources are diverted to one novel virus. The value of research teams was elevated through treatment and vaccine trials and the contribution of those involved to patient care. This reinforces an invigorated commitment to resources as well as new acceptance of and belief in research as a core care activity across and throughout systems and organisations at all levels.

Engaging with research: practical advice for nurses at every level.

Nurses at every level can reflect on their active engagement with clinical research. This article aims to support nurses to understand how they can facilitate and lead research. It provides practical advice to support the integration of research evidence into care delivery and increase the opportunities for patients to participate in clinical research. This is important because patients can benefit from nurses who are knowledgeable, confident and supported in applying research evidence. Furthermore, nurses can support and inform patient choice through increased confidence and competence in engaging with research and implementing research findings. Organisational culture and leadership are also important elements in fostering environments where evidence and research are promoted throughout the nursing workforce.