Head and neck lymphoedema-research challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Management of secondary head and neck lymphoedema has undergone little research investigation. Its treatment is time and labour intensive and involves multiple therapeutic modalities without a clear understanding of which is most effective. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing two therapeutic modalities to manage head and neck lymphoedema. The secondary objective was to evaluate the clinical effects of these treatments. Participants were randomised to receive treatment with manual lymphatic drainage or compression over 6 weeks, with the primary outcome-percentage tissue water-measured 12 weeks after treatment. Six participants were recruited until the study was ceased due to restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Some 86% of required attendances were completed. Percentage tissue water increased in all participants at 12 weeks. No consistent trends were identified between internal and external lymphoedema. The small number of people recruited to this study informs its feasibility outcomes but limits any conclusions about clinical implications.

Practitioner Engagement by Academic Researchers: A Scoping Review of Nursing, Midwifery, and Therapy Professions Literature.

BACKGROUND: Engagement of frontline practitioners by academic researchers in the research process is believed to afford benefits toward closing the research practice gap. However, little is known about if and how academic researchers engage nurses, midwives, or therapists in research activities or if evidence supports these claims of positive impact. METHOD: A scoping review was undertaken using the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework to identify the extent to which this phenomenon has been considered in the literature. RESULTS: An iterative search carried out in CINAHL, Pubmed, Medline, and Embase retrieved 32 relevant papers published 2000 to 2017, with the majority from the last 2-years. Retained papers described or evaluated active engagement of a practitioner from nursing, midwifery, and therapy disciplines in at least one stage of a research project other than as a study participant. Engagement most often took place in one research activity with few examples of engagement throughout the research process. Limited use of theory and variations in terms used to describe practitioner engagement by researchers was observed. Subjective perspectives of practitioners' experiences and a focus on challenges and benefits were the most prominently reported outcomes. Few attempts were found to establish effects which could support claims that practitioner engagement can enhance the use of findings or impact health outcomes. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that a culture of practitioner engagement is cultivated by developing guiding theory, establishing consistent terminology, and building an evidence base through empirical evaluations which provide objective data to support claims that this activity can positively influence the research practice gap.

Journal Clubs: Engaging Clinical Nurses and Midwives in Research.

It is essential that nurses and midwives can understand and critically evaluate research to ensure the delivery of high-quality evidence-based care. Journal clubs are an educational method that helps to develop research capacity and assist with bridging the gap between research and clinical practice. To maintain competence and remain current with the latest evidence, a commitment to continuing professional education is required. This article describes how a successful journal club led to clinical nurses identifying a gap in their own practice, which resulted in a research project being conducted by the members of the journal club. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2018;49(3):141-144.

How the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Can Strengthen Findings and Improve Translation of Research Into Practice: A Case Study.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To answer how the planned intervention was performed in routine care, which factors supported or distracted from its implementation, and how key organizational structures have been built and sustained.
. RESEARCH APPROACH: Mixed-methods process evaluation.
. SETTING: Two German outpatient cancer clinics.
. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sampling of 297 recruited patients with gynecologic cancer, their treating oncology nurses, and their interprofessional healthcare team, and the clinical stakeholders of two different outpatient cancer clinics.
. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), five distinct interrelated substudies were designed to evaluate intervention characteristics, inner and outer settings, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed separately and then integrated into a framework analysis.
. FINDINGS: Oncology nurses found the regular process analytic sessions to be beneficial, not only for sharing their experience, but also for experiencing social support and social connectedness.
. INTERPRETATION: Key implementation facets of the nurse-led intervention will be examined systematically. The results can guide future implementation processes, which need to be tailored to interested facilities.
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The CFIR framework is well established but not yet widely applied in supportive treatment research. The current study aims to apply and combine this framework with the concept of intervention fidelity.

[Patients, players in healthcare research]. / Les patients, acteurs de la recherche en soins.

Healthcare research is developing in France, notably through hospital nursing and paramedical research programmes. Few research projects involve the patients as investigators as part of collaborative studies. These approaches favour the involvement of all the players concerned. Thereby, healthcare research, due to its holistic dimension, encourages the development of collaborative practices between researchers, patients and caregivers.

The current state of midwifery and development of midwifery research in four European countries.

OBJECTIVE: to describe the current state of midwifery and explore the development of midwifery research during the last two decades in four non-English speaking European countries in order to understand what factors influenced the course of establishing research as a professional activity. DESIGN: qualitative collective case study. SETTING: Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands. FINDINGS: with the ICM Workshop in Germany in 1989 as a central starting point for midwifery research in all four countries, different courses, in timing as well as content, characterised its development in the individual countries. Major factors contributing to this development during the last decades involved the history and character of midwifery, initiatives of individual midwifery researchers, alliances with other professions and the transition of midwifery programmes into higher education. Whereas midwifery research is currently established as a professional role in all countries, future challenges involve the creation of its own profile and identity, while building up its own academic workforce and strengthening the role of midwifery in multidisciplinary alliances. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: although a common vision was shared between the four countries in 1989, midwifery research developed as a context-specific phenomenon related to the character of midwifery and education in each country. These factors have to be taken into account in the further development of midwifery as an academic discipline at a national as well as at an international level.

An innovative approach to facilitating nursing research.

BACKGROUND: Competing demands on the clinical time of nurses and midwives presents challenges to developing a research active culture. AIM: To engage nurses and midwives in a trust-wide research project. METHOD: A needs assessment of the local obstacles to participating in research was undertaken and a nursing and midwifery research strategy developed by representatives from clinical, research and academic departments. Following consultation with nursing and midwifery groups, an infection control research project was initiated and participatory workshops established. FINDINGS: In total 50 nurses and midwives contributed to questionnaire design, data collection and analysis. Initial results were discussed at nursing/midwifery forums and presented at a newly formed grand round. Overall there were 573 nursing and midwifery contacts throughout the research process. CONCLUSIONS: This approach to facilitating nursing and midwifery research across an NHS trust has enabled large numbers of clinical staff to experience and contribute to a 'live' research project.

Creation of an American Holistic Nurses Association research consultation program.

A goal of the American Holistic Nurses Association (AHNA) Research Committee is to prepare holistic nurses to conduct holistic nursing research. This article describes the creation of a Research Consultation Program and how the knowledge gained from the program will contribute to the development of a formal research mentor program.

An action research approach for developing research and innovation in nursing and midwifery practice: building research capacity in one NHS foundation trust.

The National Health Service in the United Kingdom is committed to a process of reform centred on quality care and innovative practice. Central to this process is the need for research capacity building within the workforce. The aim of this study was to develop an infrastructure for research capacity building within one National Health Service Foundation Trust. Using an Action Research methodology, sixteen individuals were purposefully selected from a population of nurses and midwives to participate in the study. This nonprobability sampling method enabled the researchers to select participants on the basis of who would be most informative about existing research capacity building structures and processes within the Trust. Data were collected in the form of semi-structured individual interviews with each participant. The main findings were that research activity was not embedded in the culture of the organisation, and initiating and undertaking change was a complex process. As a result, a range of structures and processes which were considered necessary to enable the Trust move forward in developing capacity and capability for research were developed and implemented. This paper reports the first two stages of this process, namely: the findings from the pre-step and an outline of how these findings were used to create an infrastructure to support research capacity building within one NHS Foundation Trust Hospital in the United Kingdom.

Exploring the compassionate care connection.

Although the word "compassion" is an integral component of nursing care, a clear conceptualization of the term is lacking. This article examines compassion from historical, biblical, and global perspectives; spiritual connections; and calls for research to help build our understanding of what compassion means and how to enter into other's suffering.

Joint or clinical chairs in nursing: from cup of plenty to poisoned chalice?

AIM: This paper presents a discussion of the current state of joint chair or clinical chair positions in nursing. Background. Joint chair positions in nursing or midwifery have been popular approaches to developing clinical research and to bridging the 'theory-practice gap'. Recent personal observations and commentaries in the literature suggest that the service-academy consensus that underpinned such positions may be crumbling. DATA SOURCES: This paper is based on 13 years' experience of holding a joint chair position, an extensive review of the professional literature (up to and including 2009 sources), and conversations and discussions with many professorial and joint chair colleagues. DISCUSSION: Despite its demonstrated success, the joint chair position may be under threat from competing and unrealistic demands from partner organizations and from changing understandings of the essential role and nature of a professor. The situation may be exacerbated by appointing inexperienced or unsuitable applicants to such key posts. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The joint chair position was a powerful initiative in nursing and midwifery with real potential. In the current climate, this potential is unlikely to be realized and nursing will be the poorer. CONCLUSION: If joint chair positions are still valued and seen as key roles in developing clinical research and university-service partnerships, then serious consideration needs to be given to the current state of position. I argue for a return to trust and what Onora O'Neill calls 'intelligent accountability' rather than the micromanagement that is so prevalent in both the health and academic industries.