Motivators and Stressors for Canadian Research Coordinators in Critical Care: The MOTIVATE Survey

Abstract

Background Critical care research coordinators implement study protocols in intensive care units, yet little is known about their experiences. Objective To identify the responsibilities, stressors, motivators, and job satisfaction of critical care research coordinators in Canada. Methods Responses to a self-administered survey were collected in order to identify and understand factors that motivate and stress research coordinators and enhance their job satisfaction. Items were generated in 5 domains (demographics, job responsibilities, stressors, motivators, and satisfaction). Face validity pretesting was conducted and clinical sensibility was evaluated. Items were rated on 5-point Likert scales. Descriptive analyses were used to report results. Results The response rate was 78% (66 of 85). Most critical care research coordinators (71%) were employed full time; they were engaged in 9 studies (7 academic, 2 industry); and 49% were nurses. Of 30 work responsibilities, the most frequently cited were submitting ethics applications (89%), performing data entry (89%), and attending meetings (87%). Highest-rated stressors were unrealistic workload and weekend/holiday screening; highest-rated motivators were a positive work environment and team spirit. Overall, 26% were “very satisfied” and 53% were “satisfied” with their jobs. Conclusions Critical care research coordinators in Canada indicate that, despite significant work responsibilities, they are satisfied with their jobs thanks to positive work environments and team spirit.

Rethinking Health Professionals’ Motivation to Do Research: A Systematic Review

“…Sixteen (16) of the studies were conducted in Australia, 3 , 52–66 eight from USA, 32 , 67–73 six from UK, 74–79 four from the Middle East, 69 , 80–82 four from Europe, 83–86 three from Africa, 16 , 87 , 88 two from South East Asia, 89 , 90 one from Japan and South Korea 91 and one each from Canada 92 and New Zealand 93 Study settings included 13 urban, 53 , 58 , 64–67 , 73 , 79–82 , 90 , 91 six regional 52 , 55 , 61–63 , 84 and five urban and rural settings. 54 , 69 , 76 , 85 , 86 Two studies were conducted in all three settings (urban, rural and remote) 56 , 59 while one was located in rural and remote settings.…”

“…Five studies focused on all HPs 56 , 59 , 65 , 66 , 92 as a heterogeneous group, two on AHPs and nurses 58 , 79 and one on nurses and physicians. 88 Overall, 18 studies concentrated on AHPs with 7 of those studies considering them as a homogenous group, 52 , 55 , 60–64 five studies were solely on pharmacists, 76 , 78 , 80–82 four on physiotherapists 75 , 85 , 86 , 93 and one each on psychologists 53 and speech language pathologists.…”

“… Very positive – attainment, intrinsic and utility value. Embedding research in clinical practice was critical and should be seen as core business Lack of designated time for research Lack of research opportunities McDonald 2020 92 Allied Health, Nurses, Physicians NIL Lacks confidence requires support. Mainly involved in applying for research ethics board approvals, entering data, attending study start-up and update meetings, and screening patients for study eligibility.…”

“…The 17 studies in which HPs were deemed very positive included six on medical doctors, 16 , 32 , 69 , 70 , 73 , 87 five on AHPs, 55 , 60 , 75 , 85 , 86 three on nurses 55 , 60 , 75 , 85 , 86 and three on a combination of the three groups. 56 , 65 , 66 The 21 studies that identified respondents as positive comprised nine on AHPs, 52 , 61 , 62 , 64 , 78 , 80–82 , 93 (including four on pharmacists 78 , 80–82 and one on physiotherapists), 93 five on nurses, 57 , 67 , 71 , 83 , 90 two on medical doctors 3 , 91 and five on a combination of the HP groups – two focused on all three HP groups, 59 , 92 two on AHPs and nurses 58 , 79 and one on medical doctors and nurses 88 The four studies in which HPs were identified as negative included two on AHPs – pharmacists 76 and psychologists, 53 one each on nurses 74 and medical doctors. 89 Another three studies reported their respondents as being afraid of research – two on AHPs 54 , 63 and one on nurses.…”

“…The most frequently reported barriers to undertaking research were lack of time and funding. Lack of designated time for research was reported in 32 (71%) studies 3 , 32 , 52–57 , 59–66 , 70 , 72 , 74–76 , 78 , 80 , 82–85 , 87–89 , 91 , 92 while lack of funding (including incentives and failed grants) was identified as a significant barrier to conducting research in 18 (40%) studies, mostly by the medical doctors, 3 , 32 , 59 , 66 , 69 , 73 , 88 , 89 , 91 followed by the AHPs 53 , 55 , 60 , 62–64 , 75 , 80 and nurses. 72 , 88 …”