Survey of research attitudes of RTTs working in Scotland: A Scottish radiographer research forum collaboration

Alice Paterson , Lynsey Devlin , Joanne Mitchell , Jacqueline Ogg , Kirsty Farnan , Suzanne Coupland , Aileen Duffton
{"title":"Survey of research attitudes of RTTs working in Scotland: A Scottish radiographer research forum collaboration","authors":"Alice Paterson ,&nbsp;Lynsey Devlin ,&nbsp;Joanne Mitchell ,&nbsp;Jacqueline Ogg ,&nbsp;Kirsty Farnan ,&nbsp;Suzanne Coupland ,&nbsp;Aileen Duffton","doi":"10.1016/j.tipsro.2024.100248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Evidence-based practice (EBP) is associated with improved treatment outcomes and survival in cancer patients. Engagement from therapeutic radiographers/radiation therapists (RTTs) in research, has been identified as a challenge. The aim of this survey was to gain an understanding of RTT attitudes to research in Scotland.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective study that used a mixed method cross-sectional survey, with an online survey tool (Webropol). The survey was developed with collaborators from all Scottish Radiotherapy Centres (n = 5) and piloted by 6 conveniently sampled RTT and validated by 8 experienced RTTs. The survey comprised 29 items, 7 selection-based demographic questions, and 18 statements with a Likert 5-point metric scale rating (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). The validity was measured with the content validity index (CVI) and item-CVI by 8 experienced RTTs. Low scoring I-CVI (&lt;0.78) questions were removed.</p><p>A total of 314 RTTs working in Scottish Radiotherapy Centres were invited to participate. Approvals were given by each Head of department (HoD), who also confirmed number of RTTs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 102/314 (32.5 %) RTTs responded. The majority of RTTs agreed they were confident they had sufficient research skills to inform EBP (n = 58/102, 56.9 %), felt confident discussing EBP with colleagues (n = 67, 65.7 %) and felt research was important for role development (n = 89, 87.2 %). Low mean scores and standard deviation (SD) were observed for the following: “I know how to get involved in research” 3.2 (1.2), “I have been given the opportunity to get involved in research” 3.2 (1.1), and “I am well informed about current research projects in my department” 3.2 (1.1). 57.8 % (n = 59) of RTTs disagreed they were confident adequate time would be provided to be involved in research.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The survey results demonstrated a predominantly positive attitude to research amongst RTTs working in Scottish centres, with most common perceived barriers being access to protected time and staff; training, and support.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36328,"journal":{"name":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000155/pdfft?md5=0e3fb083c83b12b645364ce73312a425&pid=1-s2.0-S2405632424000155-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is associated with improved treatment outcomes and survival in cancer patients. Engagement from therapeutic radiographers/radiation therapists (RTTs) in research, has been identified as a challenge. The aim of this survey was to gain an understanding of RTT attitudes to research in Scotland.

Methods

This was a prospective study that used a mixed method cross-sectional survey, with an online survey tool (Webropol). The survey was developed with collaborators from all Scottish Radiotherapy Centres (n = 5) and piloted by 6 conveniently sampled RTT and validated by 8 experienced RTTs. The survey comprised 29 items, 7 selection-based demographic questions, and 18 statements with a Likert 5-point metric scale rating (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). The validity was measured with the content validity index (CVI) and item-CVI by 8 experienced RTTs. Low scoring I-CVI (<0.78) questions were removed.

A total of 314 RTTs working in Scottish Radiotherapy Centres were invited to participate. Approvals were given by each Head of department (HoD), who also confirmed number of RTTs.

Results

A total of 102/314 (32.5 %) RTTs responded. The majority of RTTs agreed they were confident they had sufficient research skills to inform EBP (n = 58/102, 56.9 %), felt confident discussing EBP with colleagues (n = 67, 65.7 %) and felt research was important for role development (n = 89, 87.2 %). Low mean scores and standard deviation (SD) were observed for the following: “I know how to get involved in research” 3.2 (1.2), “I have been given the opportunity to get involved in research” 3.2 (1.1), and “I am well informed about current research projects in my department” 3.2 (1.1). 57.8 % (n = 59) of RTTs disagreed they were confident adequate time would be provided to be involved in research.

Conclusion

The survey results demonstrated a predominantly positive attitude to research amongst RTTs working in Scottish centres, with most common perceived barriers being access to protected time and staff; training, and support.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
苏格兰放射技师的研究态度调查:苏格兰放射技师研究论坛合作
目的以证据为基础的实践(EBP)与改善癌症患者的治疗效果和存活率有关。治疗放射技师/放射治疗师(RTT)参与研究被认为是一项挑战。这项调查的目的是了解苏格兰放射治疗技师对研究的态度。该调查由苏格兰所有放射治疗中心(n = 5)的合作者共同开发,由 6 名方便抽样的 RTT 进行试点,并由 8 名经验丰富的 RTT 进行验证。调查包括 29 个项目、7 个基于选择的人口统计学问题和 18 个陈述,采用李克特五点量表评分(1 = 非常不同意、2 = 不同意、3 = 中立、4 = 同意、5 = 非常同意)。由 8 位经验丰富的 RTT 使用内容效度指数(CVI)和项目效度指数(item-CVI)对其有效性进行测量。共有 314 名在苏格兰放射治疗中心工作的 RTT 受邀参加。结果共有 102/314 名(32.5 %)RTT 响应。大多数研究与培训人员认为,他们有信心掌握足够的研究技能,为 EBP 提供信息(n = 58/102,56.9%),有信心与同事讨论 EBP(n = 67,65.7%),并认为研究对角色发展很重要(n = 89,87.2%)。以下几项的平均分和标准差(SD)较低:"我知道如何参与研究 "3.2 (1.2),"我有机会参与研究 "3.2 (1.1),"我非常了解我所在部门当前的研究项目 "3.2 (1.1)。57.8%(n=59)的急诊科医生不认为他们有信心获得足够的时间参与研究。结论:调查结果显示,在苏格兰中心工作的急诊科医生对研究持积极态度,最常见的障碍是获得受保护的时间和人员、培训和支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
67 days
期刊最新文献
The status quo of global geriatric radiation oncology education: A scoping review A systematic review of prostate bed motion and anisotropic margins in post-prostatectomy external beam radiotherapy International virtual radiation therapy professional development: Reflections on a twinning collaboration between a low/middle and high income country A code orange for traffic-light-protocols as a communication mechanism in IGRT On the trail of CBCT-guided adaptive rectal boost radiotherapy, does daily delineation require a radiation oncologist?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1