Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on November 14, 2008
Family Practice 2009 26(1):48-55; doi:10.1093/fampra/cmn085
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
UK research staff perspectives on improving recruitment and retention to primary care research; nominal group exercise
a General Practice and Primary Care Research Unit, University of Cambridge
b United Kingdom Clinical Research Network, Stephenson House, 158-160 North Gower Street, London NW1 2ND, UK
c Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, University College London, Holborn Union Building, Witthington Campus, Highgate Hill, London N19 5LW, UK
d NIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Correspondence to Jonathan Graffy, General Practice and Primary Care Research Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK; Email: jonathan.graffy{at}phpc.cam.ac.uk
Received 30 April 2008; Revised 1 October 2008; Accepted 8 October 2008.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Background. Primary care studies often encounter recruitment difficulties, but there is little evidence to inform solutions. As part of a National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research and UK Clinical Research Network programme, we elicited research staff perspectives on factors facilitating or obstructing recruitment.
Objective. To identify factors that experienced research staff consider important in successful recruitment and retention and their confidence in achieving them.
Methods. An iterative series of three workshops was held. The third used a modified nominal group technique to categorize whether factors related to the ‘context’ in which the research took place, the ‘content’ of the study or the recruitment ‘process’ and to prioritize them by their importance to success.
Results. Eighteen research staff participated in the prioritization workshop. They prioritized positive attitudes of primary care staff towards research and trust of researchers by potential participants as major contextual factors affecting recruitment. Studies needed to be considered safe and relevant by staff and fit with practice systems. They proposed that researchers strengthen relationships with staff and participants and minimize workload for primary care teams. Although confident in many recruitment processes, respondents remained uncertain how to achieve cultural change so that research became part of normal practice activity and how best to motivate patients to participate.
Conclusions. Research workers taking part identified factors which might be important in recruitment, several of which they expressed little confidence in addressing. Understanding how to improve recruitment is crucial if current efforts to strengthen primary care research are to bear fruit.
Keywords. Attitude of health personnel, health services research, patient selection, primary health care, randomized-controlled trials.
Graffy J, Grant J, Boase S, Ward E, Wallace P, Miller J and Kinmonth AL. UK research staff perspectives on improving recruitment and retention to primary care research; nominal group exercise. Family Practice 2009; 26: 48–55.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Townsend, S. M. Cox, and L. C. Li Qualitative Research Ethics: Enhancing Evidence-Based Practice in Physical Therapy Physical Therapy, April 1, 2010; 90(4): 615 - 628. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Bower, P. Wallace, E. Ward, J. Graffy, J. Miller, B. Delaney, and A. L. Kinmonth Improving recruitment to health research in primary care Fam. Pract., October 1, 2009; 26(5): 391 - 397. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|