Abstract
The engagement of frontline practitioners in the production of research-derived knowledge is often advocated. Doing so can address perceived gaps between what is known from research and what happens in clinical practice. Engagement practices span a continuum, from co-production approaches underpinned by principles of equality and power sharing to those which can minimalize practitioners' contributions to the knowledge production process. We observed a conceptual gap in published healthcare literature that labels or defines practitioners' meaningful contribution to the research process. We, therefore, aimed to develop the concept of "Researcher Practitioner Engagement" in the context of academically initiated healthcare research in the professions of nursing, midwifery, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and speech and language therapy. Guided by Schwartz-Barcott et al.'s hybrid model of concept development, published examples were analyzed to establish the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of this type of engagement. Academic researchers (n = 17) and frontline practitioners (n = 8) with relevant experience took part in online focus groups to confirm, eliminate, or elaborate on these proposed concept components. Combined analysis of theoretical and focus group data showed that the essence of this form of engagement is that practitioners' clinical knowledge is valued from a study's formative stages. The practitioner's clinical perspectives inform problem-solving and decision-making in study activities and enhance the professional and practice relevance of a study. The conceptual model produced from the study findings forms a basis to guide engagement practices, future concept testing, and empirical evaluation of engagement practices.
Highlights
Studies that are irrelevant to the evidence needs of frontline practitioners are often cited as a contributory factor to the research–practice gap (Bowen & Graham, 2013; Greenhalgh, 2017)
Academic researchers and practitioners unanimously agreed that RPE varies in level and type dependent on study need and on the study design the amount of involvement and engagement needs to be appropriate for what's happening, rather than it just being a kind of a push towards maximum involvement and engagement for the sake of it
The importance of a practitioner's clinical perspectives to the design of a study was emphasized. This suggests that the concept attributes should be elaborated to ensure practitioner engagement is evident in a study's formative stages
Summary
Studies that are irrelevant to the evidence needs of frontline practitioners are often cited as a contributory factor to the research–practice gap (Bowen & Graham, 2013; Greenhalgh, 2017). Engagement of frontline practitioners in the research process is considered an effective strategy to overcome this issue. Those responsible for frontline care are often engaged by academic researchers in activities such as recruitment, data collection, and/or intervention delivery (Daniels et al, 2020). Is clear (Dimova et al, 2018; Marjanovic et al, 2019). Practitioners' clinical roles make them well placed to deliver study interventions as part of routine care (Boase et al, 2012; Stockwell‐Smith et al, 2015)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
