COVID-19大流行对重症监护研究的影响:一项描述性访谈研究

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of the Intensive Care Society Pub Date : 2024-12-08 DOI:10.1177/17511437241301921
Natalie A Pattison, Geraldine O'Gara, Brian H Cuthbertson, Louise Rose
{"title":"COVID-19大流行对重症监护研究的影响:一项描述性访谈研究","authors":"Natalie A Pattison, Geraldine O'Gara, Brian H Cuthbertson, Louise Rose","doi":"10.1177/17511437241301921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic challenged both research and clinical teams in critical care to collaborate on research solutions to new clinical problems. Although an effective, nationally coordinated response helped facilitate critical care research, reprioritisation of research efforts towards COVID-19 studies had significant consequences for existing and planned research activity in critical care.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Our aim was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic research prioritisation policies and practices on critical care research funded prior to the pandemic, the conduct of pandemic research, and implications for ongoing and future critical care research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a descriptive qualitative study recruiting research-active clinician researchers and research delivery team members working in critical care. We conducted digitally recorded, semi-structured interviews in 2021-2022. Framework Analysis was used to analyse the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 22 participants comprising principal investigators, senior trial coordinators and research delivery nurses from across the UK. Six themes were identified: <i>Unit, organisational and national factors; Study specific factors; Resources; Individual/clinician factors; Family/patient factors; Contextual factors.</i> These themes explained how a nationally coordinated response during the pandemic affected individuals, studies and wider organisations in managing the research response in critical care, highlighting future implications for critical care research.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Harnessing the collective response seen in the COVID-19 pandemic in critical care could better support integration of research activity into routine critical care activities. Future endeavours should focus on workforce preparations, contingency planning, strategies for study prioritisation and integration of research as part of the continuum of clinical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":" ","pages":"17511437241301921"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626551/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care research: A descriptive interview study.\",\"authors\":\"Natalie A Pattison, Geraldine O'Gara, Brian H Cuthbertson, Louise Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17511437241301921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic challenged both research and clinical teams in critical care to collaborate on research solutions to new clinical problems. Although an effective, nationally coordinated response helped facilitate critical care research, reprioritisation of research efforts towards COVID-19 studies had significant consequences for existing and planned research activity in critical care.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Our aim was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic research prioritisation policies and practices on critical care research funded prior to the pandemic, the conduct of pandemic research, and implications for ongoing and future critical care research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a descriptive qualitative study recruiting research-active clinician researchers and research delivery team members working in critical care. We conducted digitally recorded, semi-structured interviews in 2021-2022. Framework Analysis was used to analyse the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 22 participants comprising principal investigators, senior trial coordinators and research delivery nurses from across the UK. Six themes were identified: <i>Unit, organisational and national factors; Study specific factors; Resources; Individual/clinician factors; Family/patient factors; Contextual factors.</i> These themes explained how a nationally coordinated response during the pandemic affected individuals, studies and wider organisations in managing the research response in critical care, highlighting future implications for critical care research.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Harnessing the collective response seen in the COVID-19 pandemic in critical care could better support integration of research activity into routine critical care activities. Future endeavours should focus on workforce preparations, contingency planning, strategies for study prioritisation and integration of research as part of the continuum of clinical care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17511437241301921\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626551/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437241301921\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437241301921","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行对重症监护的研究和临床团队提出了挑战,要求他们合作研究解决新的临床问题。尽管有效的、国家协调一致的应对措施有助于促进重症监护研究,但将研究工作的重点重新放在COVID-19研究上,对现有和计划中的重症监护研究活动产生了重大影响。目的:我们的目的是探讨COVID-19大流行研究优先政策和实践对大流行前资助的重症监护研究的影响,大流行研究的开展,以及对正在进行和未来的重症监护研究的影响。方法:我们进行了一项描述性定性研究,招募了从事研究的临床医生、研究人员和在重症监护中工作的研究交付团队成员。我们在2021-2022年进行了数字记录的半结构化采访。采用框架分析法对数据进行分析。结果:我们采访了22名参与者,包括来自英国各地的主要研究者、高级试验协调员和研究交付护士。确定了六个主题:单位、组织和国家因素;研究具体因素;资源;个人/临床因素;家庭/病人因素;语境因素。这些主题解释了大流行期间的国家协调应对如何影响个人、研究和更广泛的组织管理重症监护的研究应对,并强调了对重症监护研究的未来影响。结论:利用COVID-19大流行在重症监护中的集体反应,可以更好地支持将研究活动整合到常规重症监护活动中。未来的努力应集中在劳动力准备、应急计划、研究优先级战略和整合研究作为临床护理连续体的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care research: A descriptive interview study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged both research and clinical teams in critical care to collaborate on research solutions to new clinical problems. Although an effective, nationally coordinated response helped facilitate critical care research, reprioritisation of research efforts towards COVID-19 studies had significant consequences for existing and planned research activity in critical care.

Aims: Our aim was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic research prioritisation policies and practices on critical care research funded prior to the pandemic, the conduct of pandemic research, and implications for ongoing and future critical care research.

Methods: We undertook a descriptive qualitative study recruiting research-active clinician researchers and research delivery team members working in critical care. We conducted digitally recorded, semi-structured interviews in 2021-2022. Framework Analysis was used to analyse the data.

Results: We interviewed 22 participants comprising principal investigators, senior trial coordinators and research delivery nurses from across the UK. Six themes were identified: Unit, organisational and national factors; Study specific factors; Resources; Individual/clinician factors; Family/patient factors; Contextual factors. These themes explained how a nationally coordinated response during the pandemic affected individuals, studies and wider organisations in managing the research response in critical care, highlighting future implications for critical care research.

Conclusion: Harnessing the collective response seen in the COVID-19 pandemic in critical care could better support integration of research activity into routine critical care activities. Future endeavours should focus on workforce preparations, contingency planning, strategies for study prioritisation and integration of research as part of the continuum of clinical care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
期刊最新文献
Predicting risk of maternal critical care admission in Scotland: Development of a risk prediction model. Management of traumatic brain injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome-What evidence exists? A scoping review. Psychological impact of an intensive care admission for COVID-19 on patients in the United Kingdom. Exploring perspectives of supporting the process of dying, death and bereavement among critical care staff: A multidisciplinary, qualitative approach. Factors to consider when designing post-hospital interventions to support critical illness recovery: Systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.
×
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