Table 6 Summary of qualitative themes from questionnaire and focus group
Category | SharedSubcategory | TREAT JC subcategories (from focus group + questionnaire) | Freq. of mention | Standard JC subcategories (from questionnaire only) | Freq. of mention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Outcomes | Individual level | Increased skills in appraisal | 30 | Increase/maintain knowledge across clinical areas | 12 |
Question how you use research | 11 | Aware of other professional interests or views | 7 | ||
More confidence in appraisal | 3 | Evidence being shared | 9 | ||
Attitudes towards research | 3 | Learning/applying critical appraisal | 5 | ||
Service outcomes | Changes or confirmed clinical practice | 10 | N/A | ||
Potential to lead to other research | 5 | ||||
More time efficient | 5 | ||||
Facilitating Mechanisms | Structure/format of session | Increased participation &MDT discussion | 29 | Roster, organisation of presenter in advance | 5 |
Six week structure encouraged attendance | 10 | Sending article early | 4 | ||
Appraisal tool and documentation | 9 | Clear appraisal tools | 3 | ||
Goal setting to identify relevant topics | 9 | Structured format | 3 | ||
Clinicians choosing topics in interest areas | 6 | Effort put in by presenters | 3 | ||
Less intimidating format | 8 | Having a portfolio for JC role | 2 | ||
Library support | 4 | Support of team: | |||
Benefit of Facilitator: | 21 | Clinician’s research knowledge shared | 6 | ||
Incidental education | 36 | Enthusiasm/support of coordinating staff | 4 | ||
Increased confidence in outcome of appraisal | 5 | Getting staff advice on how to appraise | 3 | ||
Specific mechanisms of facilitator: | Positive team culture | 2 | |||
Insider knowledge & expertise | 18 | Format for choosing article: | |||
Led deeper discussion | 15 | Linking article to clinical scenario/case | 9 | ||
Passion and energy to engage | 5 | Having article in area of interest | 2 | ||
Their availability | 4 | ||||
Preparedness | 2 | ||||
Challenges | Time & Staffing | Attendance- time to come | 38 | Time to participate | 13 |
Reduced preparedness (not reading article beforehand) | 23 | Not enough time to review article beforehand | 5 | ||
Knowledge and skill barriers | 3 | Knowledge barriers | 5 | ||
Staff changes (attendance/restructuring) | 4 | ||||
Barriers of format | Videoconference issues | 9 | Technology issue | 2 | |
Minutes actions not always followed up | 8 | Unstructured and not useful format | 2 | ||
Too much time analysing article | 6 | Not enough appraising & discussing implications | 2 | ||
Powerpoints or handouts not given | 2 | ||||
Evidence/Topic | Lack of change in practice/ evidence to change | 9 | Reduced relevance of topic of article chosen | 7 | |
Finding relevant topic for everyone | 4 | ||||
Challenges to sustainability | Turnover of staff | 5 | N/A | ||
Forgetting what was learnt | 3 | ||||
Having access to mentor | 3 | ||||
Suggestions for improvement | Education/Support00 | Extra education | 15 | Academic support during club | 6 |
Teach someone else to be facilitator | 4 | EBP education | 5 | ||
Ongoing access to researcher for support | 4 | ||||
Changes to format | Have club at different time of day | 5 | Have more structured | 5 | |
More time discussing application to practice | 4 | Ensure time to read article before/during session | 4 | ||
Choose topics as group at start | 3 | Discuss application to practice | 3 | ||
Ensure everyone reads article beforehand | 3 | Make more interactive | 2 | ||