Abstract:Participatory action research (PAR) is a method of inquiry that promotes a collaborative approach to knowledge creation. This article examined areas of research interest that included PAR methods, highlighting the areas of improvement that such approaches might offer to researchers and scientists in the nursing field. Among the 20 included studies, participatory concepts are more likely used to direct research design than to select participants. About two-thirds of the studies reviewed used PAR principles in d… Show more
“…However, in the case of mental health nursing, only half of the studies included users. This is also the case in other contexts, where there are still a small number of studies in which equal groups are formed between researchers and other stakeholders, not only in the design of the study but also in the selection of participants and data collection and analysis (Effendy et al, 2022;Wiles et al, 2022). From a methodological perspective, it is important to emphasize that although there are different approaches to action research (Rowell et al, 2017), the results of the review indicate that in the field of mental health nursing the commonly used method is Participatory Action Research.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…However, in the case of mental health nursing, only half of the studies included users. This is also the case in other contexts, where there are still a small number of studies in which equal groups are formed between researchers and other stakeholders, not only in the design of the study but also in the selection of participants and data collection and analysis (Effendy et al, 2022 ; Wiles et al, 2022 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Action research is a research method that facilitates understanding and improving the world by transforming it (Kemmis & Mctaggart, 2008 ). Traditionally, this type of approach has been used in the social sciences (Rowell et al, 2017 ), although in recent years it is also been successfully used internationally in the area of health sciences (Cordeiro & Soares, 2018 ) and, specifically, in the field of nursing (Effendy et al, 2022 ). In fact, action research has been shown to be useful for implementing evidence‐based practice (Munten et al, 2010 ) in the area of nursing education or for improving nursing practices in intensive care (Soh et al, 2011 ).…”
Aims:To identify and synthesize evidence on the use of action research methods in mental health nursing care.Design: Systematic review.Data Sources: CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched in January 2021.Review Methods: Data were selected using the updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis framework. Two reviewers independently conducted the study selection, and quality appraisal using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Q ualitative Research, data extraction and data analysis procedures.Results: Sixteen studies, half of which used participatory action research, were included in this review. Nurses, along with other stakeholders, were an active part of the action research process. The main topics of interest addressed were categorized as improving the adoption of a person-centred approach to care and improving decisionmaking procedures. The use of action research helped the participants to identify the meaning they attached to the topic of interest to be improved. Moreover, this method helped to identify needs and strategies for improving care. The studies concurred that the use of action research enabled participants to gain awareness, improve attitudes and acquire knowledge. In addition, it enabled participants to gain confidence and security in the group context, as key aspects of their empowerment.
Conclusion:This review shows the usefulness of action research in any mental health nursing context, contributing to the improvement of care at both the individual and collective levels.Impact: This paper demonstrates the use of the action research method in the field of mental health nursing. Its use has improved the clinical practice of nurses as well as that of teams in both community and hospital settings, addressing issues of the person-centred approach to care and decision-making procedures.
“…However, in the case of mental health nursing, only half of the studies included users. This is also the case in other contexts, where there are still a small number of studies in which equal groups are formed between researchers and other stakeholders, not only in the design of the study but also in the selection of participants and data collection and analysis (Effendy et al, 2022;Wiles et al, 2022). From a methodological perspective, it is important to emphasize that although there are different approaches to action research (Rowell et al, 2017), the results of the review indicate that in the field of mental health nursing the commonly used method is Participatory Action Research.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…However, in the case of mental health nursing, only half of the studies included users. This is also the case in other contexts, where there are still a small number of studies in which equal groups are formed between researchers and other stakeholders, not only in the design of the study but also in the selection of participants and data collection and analysis (Effendy et al, 2022 ; Wiles et al, 2022 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Action research is a research method that facilitates understanding and improving the world by transforming it (Kemmis & Mctaggart, 2008 ). Traditionally, this type of approach has been used in the social sciences (Rowell et al, 2017 ), although in recent years it is also been successfully used internationally in the area of health sciences (Cordeiro & Soares, 2018 ) and, specifically, in the field of nursing (Effendy et al, 2022 ). In fact, action research has been shown to be useful for implementing evidence‐based practice (Munten et al, 2010 ) in the area of nursing education or for improving nursing practices in intensive care (Soh et al, 2011 ).…”
Aims:To identify and synthesize evidence on the use of action research methods in mental health nursing care.Design: Systematic review.Data Sources: CINAHL, Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched in January 2021.Review Methods: Data were selected using the updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis framework. Two reviewers independently conducted the study selection, and quality appraisal using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Q ualitative Research, data extraction and data analysis procedures.Results: Sixteen studies, half of which used participatory action research, were included in this review. Nurses, along with other stakeholders, were an active part of the action research process. The main topics of interest addressed were categorized as improving the adoption of a person-centred approach to care and improving decisionmaking procedures. The use of action research helped the participants to identify the meaning they attached to the topic of interest to be improved. Moreover, this method helped to identify needs and strategies for improving care. The studies concurred that the use of action research enabled participants to gain awareness, improve attitudes and acquire knowledge. In addition, it enabled participants to gain confidence and security in the group context, as key aspects of their empowerment.
Conclusion:This review shows the usefulness of action research in any mental health nursing context, contributing to the improvement of care at both the individual and collective levels.Impact: This paper demonstrates the use of the action research method in the field of mental health nursing. Its use has improved the clinical practice of nurses as well as that of teams in both community and hospital settings, addressing issues of the person-centred approach to care and decision-making procedures.
“…In PubMed, there are over 10,000 references to CBPR, with a dramatic increase in the number of publications beginning in 2010. In a recent scoping review of participatory action research studies, Effendy et al (2022) identified 553 nursing studies. In addition, several nursing texts (De Chesnay, 2015; Pavlish & Pharris, 2012) focus on describing the foundations and detailing the processes of CBPR.…”
Section: Nursing Science and Research Methodsmentioning
While community-based participatory research (CBPR) and other related participatory action research approaches are increasingly being used in nursing research, few of these studies are conceptualized within an extant nursing framework. Instead, CBPR is typically only grounded in socio-ecological and social justice frameworks. However, knowledge is developed in a discipline through research that is conceptualized within the discipline’s conceptual systems, frameworks, or theories. This article begins with an explication of the processes and theoretical foundations of CBPR and concludes by offering Falk-Rafael’s Critical Caring Theory (CCT) as an ideal theory for reframing CBPR within a nursing science perspective.
“…It is useful for exploring the phenomenon under study because it makes it easier for participants to identify both the aspects to be improved and the most effective procedure to carry out such improvement (Casey et al, 2022). This research methodology has been introduced in recent years in the area of health sciences with successful results (Cordeiro & Soares, 2018) and, more specifically, in the nursing field (Effendy et al, 2022) as a pathway to implementing evidence‐based practice (Munten et al, 2010). In this sense, the PAR process in the nursing discipline enables a better understanding of the study phenomenon to design improvement strategies, implement changes and transform clinical practice (Bradbury et al, 2019) through a cyclical and continuous interaction of different stages such as action, reflection and evaluation (Rowell et al, 2017).…”
Aims and Objectives
To explore the process of change within the clinical practice of nurses in mental health inpatient units in the context of a participatory process to improve the nurse–patient therapeutic relationship.
Design
Participatory Action Research.
Methods
Ninety‐six nurses from 18 mental health units participated. Data were collected through focus groups and reflective diaries between March 2018 and January 2020. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis. The COREQ guidelines were used.
Results
The research process was carried out through two cycles of four stages each in which the nurses were able to identify the facilitating and limiting elements of their practice in relation to the therapeutic relationship. They then proposed two consensual improvement strategies for all the units, which they called reserved therapeutic space and postincident analysis. Finally, they implemented and evaluated the two strategies for change.
Conclusions
This study has shown that, despite the different cultural and structural realities of the participating units, it is possible to implement a collaborative process of change, provided the needs and expectations of both the participants and the organisations are similar.
Relevance to Clinical Practice
The results obtained through Participatory Action Research were directly transferred to clinical practice, thus having an impact on individual nurses and patients, as well as on the collective dynamics of the teams and aspects related to the management of the units.
No Patient or Public Contribution
Patient or public input is not directly applicable to this study. Patients were recipients of the changes that were occurring in the nurses as part of their daily clinical practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.