首页> 外文OA文献 >Multiple triangulation and collaborative research using qualitative methods to explore decision making in pre-hospital emergency care.
【2h】

Multiple triangulation and collaborative research using qualitative methods to explore decision making in pre-hospital emergency care.

机译:使用定性方法进行多重三角测量和协作研究,以探索院前急救护理中的决策。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND: Paramedics make important and increasingly complex decisions at scene about patient care. Patient safety implications of influences on decision making in the pre-hospital setting were previously under-researched. Cutting edge perspectives advocate exploring the whole system rather than individual influences on patient safety. Ethnography (the study of people and cultures) has been acknowledged as a suitable method for identifying health care issues as they occur within the natural context. In this paper we compare multiple methods used in a multi-site, qualitative study that aimed to identify system influences on decision making. METHODS: The study was conducted in three NHS Ambulance Trusts in England and involved researchers from each Trust working alongside academic researchers. Exploratory interviews with key informants e.g. managers (n = 16) and document review provided contextual information. Between October 2012 and July 2013 researchers observed 34 paramedic shifts and ten paramedics provided additional accounts via audio-recorded 'digital diaries' (155 events). Three staff focus groups (total n = 21) and three service user focus groups (total n = 23) explored a range of experiences and perceptions. Data collection and analysis was carried out by academic and ambulance service researchers as well as service users. Workshops were held at each site to elicit feedback on the findings and facilitate prioritisation of issues identified. RESULTS: The use of a multi-method qualitative approach allowed cross-validation of important issues for ambulance service staff and service users. A key factor in successful implementation of the study was establishing good working relationships with academic and ambulance service teams. Enrolling at least one research lead at each site facilitated the recruitment process as well as study progress. Active involvement with the study allowed ambulance service researchers and service users to gain a better understanding of the research process. Feedback workshops allowed stakeholders to discuss and prioritise findings as well as identify new research areas. CONCLUSION: Combining multiple qualitative methods with a collaborative research approach can facilitate exploration of system influences on patient safety in under-researched settings. The paper highlights empirical issues, strengths and limitations for this approach. Feedback workshops were effective for verifying findings and prioritising areas for future intervention and research.
机译:背景:护理人员会在现场做出重要且日益复杂的患者护理决策。先前对在院前环境中影响决策制定的患者安全隐患进行了研究。前沿观点主张探索整个系统,而不是对患者安全的个体影响。人种学(对人与文化的研究)被认为是识别自然环境中出现的医疗保健问题的合适方法。在本文中,我们比较了在多站点,定性研究中使用的多种方法,这些方法旨在确定系统对决策的影响。方法:该研究是在英格兰的三个NHS救护车信托基金中进行的,每个信托基金的研究人员与学术研究人员一起工作。对关键知情人的探索性访谈,例如经理(n = 16)和文档审阅提供了上下文信息。在2012年10月至2013年7月之间,研究人员观察到34位护理人员的转变,另外10位护理人员通过录音的“数字日记”(155个事件)提供了额外的说明。三个员工焦点小组(总计n = 21)和三个服务用户焦点小组(n = 23)探索了一系列的经验和看法。数据收集和分析是由学术和救护车服务研究人员以及服务用户进行的。在每个站点都举行了研讨会,以征求对发现的反馈并促进对已确定问题的优先级排序。结果:采用多方法定性方法可以对救护车服务人员和服务使用者的重要问题进行交叉验证。成功实施研究的关键因素是与学术和救护车服务团队建立良好的工作关系。在每个站点至少招募一名研究主管可以促进招聘过程和研究进度。积极参与研究使救护车服务研究人员和服务使用者对研究过程有了更好的了解。反馈研讨会使利益相关者可以讨论研究结果并确定其优先级,并确定新的研究领域。结论:将多种定性方法与协作研究方法相结合,可以促进在研究不足的环境中探索系统对患者安全的影响。本文重点介绍了此方法的经验问题,优势和局限性。反馈研讨会对于验证发现和确定未来干预和研究领域的优先次序非常有效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号