Building Capacity for Research and Audit: Outcomes of a Training Workshop for Pacific Physicians and Nurses

Abstract

Building the research capacity of clinicians in the Pacific Island countries is important in addressing evidence gaps relevant to local policy and clinical practice. This paper aimed to assess the effectiveness of a reproductive health research workshop in increasing research knowledge and intention to perform research amongst a diverse group of clinicians. An online survey of clinicians and stakeholders in the Pacific Islands informed a research workshop curriculum. Physicians and nurses/midwives (n = 28) from six Pacific Island countries were selected as workshop participants as part of a research capacity building program. Questionnaires before after the workshop were used to measure the changes in knowledge, confidence, competence, attitudes and intention to perform research and these were analysed thematically. Sixty-three of 85 (74%) stakeholders and clinicians responded to an online survey, which informed workshop curriculum development. Of the 28 workshop participants, seven were obstetrician-gynaecologists, eight junior physicians and eleven nurses/midwives. The mean pre-test score was 36% (10) and the post-test was 43% (6) (p<0.01). By profession, the obstetricians had higher prior research knowledge whereas nurses had a higher knowledge gain after the workshop. Attitude, intention and motivation to perform research was high and the participants learnt that research is important, to start small; to use routinely collected data; to encourage others to do research; and to network regionally. This paper has confirmed that online surveys, in low resource settings, can have an acceptable response rate. It has also shown that a research workshop for a diverse group of clinicians can be effective in increasing knowledge although knowledge gained was more significant amongst nurses/midwives compared to physicians. The other benefits of the research workshop were increased motivation and attitudes for research, which if well supported, should result in an increase in research output in the Pacific Islands. Future evaluation will assess the long-term effectiveness of annual research workshops and mentoring support in improving research performance and evidence utilisation in care.

Research capacity in nursing: a concept analysis based on a scoping review

“…Research capacity in nursing is commonly used at a non-individual level (one of the attributes we noted), suggesting that it is a concept used more with a macro perspective 32. However, because of the lack of a consistent definition of research capacity in nursing, a few researchers used research capacity in reference to research knowledge, skill and interest/attitude on the individual level 37 38. In those few cases, using the term ‘research competence and attitude’ might have been more suitable, based on the findings of this study which found that generally, research capacity in nursing was used at a non-individual level.…”

Development and use of a research productivity assessment tool for clinicians in low-resource settings in the Pacific Islands: a Delphi study

“…Bissell et al [ 30 ] reported on two research courses, each with three 5-day modules; assessment of 24 participants at the end of 2 years found that 17 (71 %) completed the course and 18 manuscripts had been accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. In our study [ 20 ], comprised of a workshop of 7 days and supportive mentoring, only 18 (64 %) returned the assessment questionnaire and there were only two accepted publications. The participants’ clinical background was similar in both studies, although the majority of Bissell’s participants were from Fiji; both groups had access to experienced research mentors and online support.…”

“…The 28 study participants were clinicians selected from the leadership of the reproductive health services in six Pacific countries and criteria of selection have been previously published [ 17 , 20 ]. After a research workshop in March 2013, they were supported with assigned research mentors to work on research and clinical audit projects.…”

“…The aims of the present paper were to develop a research performance-appropriate tool for clinicians working in low-resource settings such as those in the Pacific Islands. The tool is then to be used to assess the research productivity of 28 clinicians of the BRRACAP Study [ 20 ].…”

Describing the evidence-base for research engagement by health care providers and health care organisations: a scoping review.

“…Of the 21 databased studies that were interventions, only two were controlled studies (28, 29) and one was a protocol of a controlled trial (30). Nine studies were post-intervention, cross sectional assessments without control arms (31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39), ve were prospective or retrospective cohorts, pre-post studies, or repeat cross sectional assessments (40)(41)(42)(43)(44) and four were reviews (45)(46)(47)(48).…”