What scholarly practice means to respiratory therapists: An interpretive description study

Zaccagnini, M., Bussières, A., Kim, S., Nugus, P., West, A. et Thomas, A. (2023). What scholarly practice means to respiratory therapists: An interpretive description study. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice . ISSN 1356-1294 1365-2753 DOI 10.1111/jep.13917

Prévisualisation

PDF Disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution. Télécharger (2MB) | Prévisualisation

Résumé

Abstract

Rationale
Engagement in scholarly practice has been associated with professional empowerment, role satisfaction and improvements in care delivery and patient outcomes across many healthcare professions. However, in evolving professions like respiratory therapy, scholarly practice is excluded from competency frameworks, resulting in a gap in education and subsequent application of this competency in practice. An exploration of scholarly practice in respiratory therapy may provide insights into evolving professions that face tensions between meeting competency requirements as outlined in frameworks and providing quality healthcare to the populations they serve.

Aims and Objectives
The aim of the study was to explore what scholarly practice means, and how it manifests in practice from respiratory therapists' (RTs) perspectives.

Methods
We used interpretive description methodology. We purposively sampled participants to obtain varied perspectives of scholarly practice in respiratory therapy. We conducted 26 semistructured interviews with RTs in different roles (clinicians, educators, researchers, leaders and managers) across Canada and analysed the data using inductive analysis. Data collection and analysis proceeded concurrently.

Results
We developed five main themes: (i) the identity of a scholarly practitioner in RTs; (ii) factors influencing scholarly practice; (iii) one's impression of their professional self-image; (iv) scholarly practice as a vehicle for changing practice and (v) the complex interconnections between knowledges and practices.

Conclusion
Scholarly practice appears to be a multifaceted phenomenon encompassing a wide range of activities and skills including conducting research, reflective practice, application of research to practice, and contributing to the advancement of the profession and healthcare. Scholarly practice is influenced by organisational context and culture, available resources, intrinsic motivation and external political context. We identified similarities between professional identity and the description of the scholarly practitioner, suggesting that these two phenomena may be interconnected. Furthermore, participants believed that scholarly practice could enhance the image, credibility, legitimacy and professionalisation of the profession.

Type de document:	Article
Date de dépôt:	23 avr. 2024 18:29
Dernière modification:	23 avr. 2024 18:29
Version du document déposé:	Version officielle de l'éditeur
URI:	https://depot-e.uqtr.ca/id/eprint/11267

Actions (administrateurs uniquement)

Éditer la notice