Realist analysis of qualitative data in health professions education research.

BACKGROUND: Qualitative realist analysis is gaining in popularity in health professions education research (HPER) as part of theory-driven program evaluation. Although realist approaches such as syntheses and evaluations typically advocate mixed methods, qualitative data dominate currently. Various forms of qualitative analysis have been articulated in HPER, yet realist analysis has not. Although realist analysis is interpretive, it moves beyond description to explain generative causation employing retroductive theorising. Ultimately, it attempts to build and/or 'test' (confirm, refute or refine) theory about how, why, for whom, when and to what extent programs work using the context-mechanism-outcome configuration (CMOC) heuristic. This paper aims to help readers better critique, conduct and report qualitative realist analysis. REALIST ANALYSIS METHODS: We describe four fundamentals of qualitative realist analysis: (1) simultaneous data collection/analysis; (2) retroductive theorising; (3) configurational analysis (involving iterative phases of identifying CMOCs, synthesising CMOCs into demi-regularities and translating demi-regularities into program theory); and (4) realist analysis quality (relevance, rigour, richness). Next, we provide a critical analysis of realist analyses employed in 15 HPER outputs-three evaluations and 12 syntheses. Finally, drawing on our understandings of realist literature and our experiences of conducting qualitative realist analysis (both evaluations and syntheses), we articulate three common analysis challenges (coding, consolidation and mapping) and strategies to mitigate these challenges (teamwork, reflexivity and consultation, use of data analysis software and graphical representations of program theory). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our critical analysis of the literature and realist analysis experiences, we encourage researchers, peer reviewers and readers to better understand qualitative realist analysis fundamentals. Realist analysts should draw on relevant realist reporting standards and literature on realist analysis to improve the quality and reporting of realist analysis. Through better understanding the common challenges and mitigation strategies for realist analysis, we can collectively improve the quality of realist analysis in HPER.

Does randomised evidence alter clinical practise? The react qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the results of the 'Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH) Trial' were published in The Lancet. This demonstrated the superiority of small bite laparotomy closure over mass closure for the reduction of incisional hernias; despite this most surgeons have not changed their practice. Previous research has shown the time taken for the implementation of evidenced based practise within medicine takes an average of 17 years. This study aims to understand the reasons why surgeons have and have not changed their practice with regards to closure of midline laparotomy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were completed with surgical consultants and registrars at a single institution in South West England. The interview topic guide was informed by a review of the published literature, which identified barriers to adopting evidence into surgical practice. Interview transcripts underwent thematic analysis with themes identified following discussions within the research team, exploring views on published data and clinical practise. RESULTS: Nine interviews with general surgical and urological consultants as well as registrars in training were performed. Three themes were identified; 'Trusting the Evidence & Critical Appraisal', 'Surgical Attitude to Risk' and 'Adopting Evidence in Practise', that reflected barriers to the introduction of evidenced based practise to clinical work. CONCLUSION: Identification of the themes highlights possible areas for intervention to decrease the adoption time for evidence, for example from randomised controlled trials. The continued updating of clinical practise allows clinicians to provide best evidenced based care for patients and improve their outcomes.

Kindness in healthcare leadership and management: an evaluation and analysis of the concept.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare leadership and management impacts every patient journey and every staff experience. Good leadership results in positive outcomes. Kindness is an understudied and underused leadership strategy. The research questions addressed in this study are the following: (1) Does kindness in healthcare leadership and management currently meet the criteria of a mature concept?; (2) Using concept analysis methodology, can we develop our understanding of kindness within this context? METHODS: A systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature was conducted to inform a concept evaluation, followed by a concept analysis. Search terms consisted of 'leader*' or 'manage*' and 'kindness'; databases searched comprised MEDLINE, HMIC, SPP, APA PsycInfo and CINAHL. Data extraction and thematic analysis of the data were performed manually according to concept analysis principles. RESULTS: The 10 papers included from the search suggested that within healthcare leadership and management, kindness is an 'emerging' rather than a 'mature' concept. Concept analysis demonstrated a cluster of recurring attributes, allowing a theoretical definition to be put forth. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being a commonly used lay term, kindness in the context of healthcare leadership and management is not yet a mature concept. Work developing this concept is needed to validate the proposed theoretical definition. Observational studies and systematic review of the grey literature are recommended.

Developing a typology of interventions to support doctors' mental health and wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: The problem of mental ill-health in doctors is complex, accentuated by the COVID-19 pandemic, and impacts on healthcare provision and broader organisational performance. There are many interventions to address the problem but currently no systematic way to categorise them, which makes it hard to describe and compare interventions. As a result, implementation tends to be unfocussed and fall short of the standards developed for implementing complex healthcare interventions. This study aims to develop: 1) a conceptual typology of workplace mental health and wellbeing interventions and 2) a mapping tool to apply the typology within research and practice. METHODS: Typology development was based on iterative cycles of analysis of published and in-practice interventions, incorporation of relevant theories and frameworks, and team and stakeholder group discussions. RESULTS: The newly developed typology and mapping tool enable interventions to be conceptualised and/or mapped into different categories, for example whether they are designed to be largely preventative (by either improving the workplace or increasing personal resources) or to resolve problems after they have arisen. Interventions may be mapped across more than one category to reflect the nuance and complexity in many mental health and wellbeing interventions. Mapping of interventions indicated that most publications have not clarified their underlying assumptions about what causes outcomes or the theoretical basis for the intervention. CONCLUSION: The conceptual typology and mapping tool aims to raise the quality of future research and promote clear thinking about the nature and purpose of interventions, In doing so it aims to support future research and practice in planning interventions to improve the mental health and wellbeing of doctors.

Repairing disrupted care processes as sources of stability, learning and change in a Finnish hospital: An activity-theoretical study.

INTRODUCTION: In high-income countries, it is estimated that one in every 10 patients is harmed while receiving hospital care; 50% of these are preventable. The aim of this study was to deepen our understanding of disruptions of care processes and how the repairing of disruptions can be sources of stability, learning and change in complex health care settings. METHODS: The organisational interactions associated with disruptions in the standard care processes of 15 surgical patients were followed in a public sector hospital in Finland. The patients and medical professionals were interviewed in situ during the observation of the care processes. An activity-theoretically informed methodological framework was used to identify and analyse disruptions and the associated repair efforts and repair solutions. RESULTS: Disruptions were frequent and found in all 15 care processes. These related to (1) the patient's worsening physiological state, (2) the equipment used in surgical care, (3) the information flow, (4) delays in the care process and (5) the unclear division of labour within the team. The actors carried out three types of repair efforts (technical, cognitive-emotional and extended collaborative) to overcome the disrupted processes, which usually led to repair solutions that restored stability. DISCUSSION: The different repair efforts required different kinds of collaboration and learning. Extended collaborative repair was most demanding, providing challenges and opportunities for practice change and expansive learning.

How prepared are newly qualified allied health professionals for practice in the UK? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: It is important that allied health professionals (AHPs) are prepared for clinical practice from the very start of their working lives to provide quality care for patients, for their personal well-being and for retention of the workforce. The aim of this study was to understand how well newly qualified AHPs were prepared for practice in the UK. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC and BEI were searched from 2012 to 2024. Grey literature searching and citation chasing were also conducted. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included primary studies reporting the preparedness for practice of UK graduates across 15 professions; all study types; participants included graduates who were up to 2 years postgraduation, their supervisors, trainers, practice educators and employers; and all outcome measures. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A standardised data extraction form was used. Studies were quality assessed using the Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies tool. 10% of articles were independently double-screened, extracted and quality assessed; 90% was completed by one researcher. RESULTS: 14 reports were included (9 qualitative, 3 mixed-method and 2 quantitative). Six papers focused on radiographers, three on a mixture of professions, two on paramedics, and one each on physiotherapists, clinical psychologists and orthotists. An important finding of the review is the paucity and low-medium quality of research on the topic. The narrative synthesis tentatively suggests that graduates are adequately prepared for practice with different professions having different strengths and weaknesses. Common areas of underpreparedness across the professions were responsibility and decision-making, leadership and research. Graduates were generally well prepared in terms of their knowledge base. CONCLUSION: High-quality in-depth research is urgently needed across AHPs to elucidate the specific roles, their nuances and the areas of underpreparedness. Further work is also needed to understand the transition into early clinical practice, ongoing learning opportunities through work, and the supervision and support structures in place. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022382065.

Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review.

Background: Nurses, midwives and paramedics are the largest collective group of clinical staff in the National Health Service and have some of the highest prevalence of psychological ill-health. Existing literature tends to be profession-specific and focused on individual interventions that place responsibility for good psychological health with nurses, midwives and paramedics themselves. Aim: To improve understanding of how, why and in what contexts nurses, midwives and paramedics experience work-related psychological ill-health; and determine which high-quality interventions can be implemented to minimise psychological ill-health in these professions. Methods: Realist synthesis methodology consistent with realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards' reporting guidelines. Data sources: First round database searching in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online Database ALL (via Ovid), cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature database (via EBSCO) and health management information consortium database (via Ovid), was undertaken between February and March 2021, followed by supplementary searching strategies (e.g. hand searching, expert solicitation of key papers). Reverse chronology screening was applied, aimed at retaining 30 relevant papers in each profession. Round two database searches (December 2021) targeted COVID-19-specific literature and literature reviews. No date limits were applied. Results: We built on seven key reports and included 75 papers in the first round (26 nursing, 26 midwifery, 23 paramedic) plus 44 expert solicitation papers, 29 literature reviews and 49 COVID-19 focused articles in the second round. Through the realist synthesis we surfaced 14 key tensions in the literature and identified five key findings, supported by 26 context mechanism and outcome configurations. The key findings identified the following: (1) interventions are fragmented, individual-focused and insufficiently recognise cumulative chronic stressors; (2) it is difficult to promote staff psychological wellness where there is a blame culture; (3) the needs of the system often override staff well-being at work ('serve and sacrifice'); (4) there are unintended personal costs of upholding and implementing values at work; and (5) it is challenging to design, identify and implement interventions to work optimally for diverse staff groups with diverse and interacting stressors. Conclusions: Our realist synthesis strongly suggests the need to improve the systemic working conditions and the working lives of nurses, midwives and paramedics to improve their psychological well-being. Individual, one-off psychological interventions are unlikely to succeed alone. Psychological ill-health is highly prevalent in these staff groups (and can be chronic and cumulative as well as acute) and should be anticipated and prepared for, indeed normalised and expected. Healthcare organisations need to (1) rebalance the working environment to enable healthcare professionals to recover and thrive; (2) invest in multi-level system approaches to promote staff psychological well-being; and use an organisational diagnostic framework, such as the NHS England and NHS Improvement Health and Wellbeing framework, to self-assess and implement a systems approach to staff well-being. Future work: Future research should implement, refine and evaluate systemic interventional strategies. Interventions and evaluations should be co-designed with front-line staff and staff experts by experience, and tailored where possible to local, organisational and workforce needs. Limitations: The literature was not equivalent in size and quality across the three professions and we did not carry out citation searches using hand searching and stakeholder/expert suggestions to augment our sample. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020172420. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172420. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129528) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The National Health Service needs healthy, motivated staff to provide high-quality patient care. Nurses, midwives and paramedics experience poor psychological health (e.g. stress/anxiety) because of pressured environments and the difficulties of healthcare work. This study planned to better understand the causes of poor psychological ill-health in nurses, midwives and paramedics and find which interventions might help and why. We analysed the literature using a method called 'realist review' to understand how interventions work (or not), why, and for who. We tested our findings with patients, the public, nurses, midwives and paramedics in our stakeholder group. We reviewed over 200 papers/reports and identified five main findings: (1) existing solutions (interventions) are disjointed, focus mainly on the individual (not the system) and do not recognise enduring stressors enough; (2) when there is a blame culture it is difficult to encourage staff psychological well-being; (3) the needs of the system often override staff psychological well-being at work; (4) upholding and implementing personal and professional values at work can have negative personal costs; and (5) it is difficult to design, identify and implement solutions that work well for staff groups in different circumstances with varied causes of poor psychological health. Healthcare organisations should consider: (1) changing (rebalancing) the working environment to help healthcare professionals rest, recover and thrive; (2) investing in multiple-level system (not just individual) approaches to staff psychological well-being; (3) continuing to reduce stigma; (4) ensuring the essential needs of staff are prioritised (rest-breaks/hydration/hot food) as building blocks for other solutions; (5) addressing the blame culture, assuming staff are doing their best in difficult conditions; (6) prioritising staff needs, as well as patient needs. We will provide guidance and recommendations to policy-makers and organisational leaders to improve work cultures that tackle psychological ill-health and suggest new areas for research.

Care Under Pressure 2: a realist synthesis of causes and interventions to mitigate psychological ill health in nurses, midwives and paramedics.

BACKGROUND: Nurses, midwives and paramedics comprise over half of the clinical workforce in the UK National Health Service and have some of the highest prevalence of psychological ill health. This study explored why psychological ill health is a growing problem and how we might change this. METHODS: A realist synthesis involved iterative searches within MEDLINE, CINAHL and HMIC, and supplementary handsearching and expert solicitation. We used reverse chronological quota screening and appraisal journalling to analyse each source and refine our initial programme theory. A stakeholder group comprising nurses, midwives, paramedics, patient and public representatives, educators, managers and policy makers contributed throughout. RESULTS: Following initial theory development from 8 key reports, 159 sources were included. We identified 26 context-mechanism-outcome configurations, with 16 explaining the causes of psychological ill health and 10 explaining why interventions have not worked to mitigate psychological ill health. These were synthesised to five key findings: (1) it is difficult to promote staff psychological wellness where there is a blame culture; (2) the needs of the system often over-ride staff psychological well-being at work; (3) there are unintended personal costs of upholding and implementing values at work; (4) interventions are fragmented, individual-focused and insufficiently recognise cumulative chronic stressors; and (5) it is challenging to design, identify and implement interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Our final programme theory argues the need for healthcare organisations to rebalance the working environment to enable healthcare professionals to recover and thrive. This requires high standards for patient care to be balanced with high standards for staff psychological well-being; professional accountability to be balanced with having a listening, learning culture; reactive responsive interventions to be balanced by having proactive preventative interventions; and the individual focus balanced by an organisational focus. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172420.

Medical Student Intentions to Move Abroad: A UK-Based Realist Evaluation.

Introduction: Medical students moving abroad after qualification may contribute to domestic healthcare workforce shortages. Greater insights into how medical students make decisions about moving abroad may improve post-qualification retention. The aim was to develop a programme theory explaining medical students' intentions to move abroad or not. Methods: In Phase 1 the initial programme theory was generated from a literature review. In Phase 2, the theory was developed through 30 realist interviews with medical students from a medical school in the United Kingdom. In Phase 3 the final programme theory was used to produce recommendations for stakeholders. Results: The findings highlight the complex decision-making that medical students undertake when deciding whether to move abroad. We identified five contexts and six mechanisms leading to two outcomes (intention to move abroad and no intention to move abroad). Conclusions: This realist evaluation has demonstrated how contexts and mechanisms may interact to enable specific outcomes. These insights have allowed evidence-based recommendations to be made with a view to retaining graduates, including protected time within medical curricula to experience other healthcare systems, improved availability of domestic postgraduate posts providing domestic career certainty and stronger domestic-based social support networks for graduates.