Practitioner‐researchers in occupational therapy

Abstract

Few occupational therapy clinicians are research productive even though their involvement in research is encouraged. The role of ‘research‐practitioner’ is put forward as a means by which practitioners can be research productive. There is, however, an absence of studies exploring experience of the minority of practitioners who do produce research. This study used a qualitative approach to do this in occupational therapy. Purposive sampling was conducted of all research productive clinicians in acute‐care hospitals in one Australian city. Of the 20 possible researchers, 15 participated in in‐depth interviews which explored their experience of research. Results were analysed using the constant comparative method and six conceptual categories were developed to describe their experience. The key findings were that clinicians who did research perceived themselves to be different from other clinicians in terms of attributes; and they described special ways of getting research done, and ways of reflecting on outcomes of their research involvement. The study provides an empirical foundation to further consider the practitioner‐researcher role in practice professions such as occupational therapy.

Clinical outcomes research from the occupational therapist's perspective

“…This perceived importance facilitated the participants' interest in and intent to be involved in research, but, similarly, many barriers were described that influenced their use and production of research in the clinical environment. In Australia, Cusick and her colleagues have investigated clinicians' (including managers') views on research more broadly (Cusick et al, 1999;Cusick, 2000Cusick, , 2001. This research supports the findings of the international studies cited above, and further extends our understanding by investigating the experiences of clinicians who are active and productive in research.…”

“…As a result, treatment effectiveness and outcome studies have been identified as key issues for the profession (Llorens and Gillette, 1985;Llorens and Snyder, 1987;Law, 1989a;Taylor and Mitchell, 1990;Timmerman et al, 1994;Unsworth, 2000). Active involvement of clinicians in clinical research has been advocated to facilitate professional practice that is grounded in theory and research, and provides quality care to our clients (Baum et al, 1984;Llorens and Gillette, 1985;Mitcham, 1986;Llorens and Snyder, 1987;Cusick, 1987Cusick, , 1994Cusick, , 2000Law, 1989a;Taylor and Mitchell, 1990;Rogers and Holm, 1994;Timmerman et al, 1994).…”

“…Clinicians in this study viewed themselves as a part of a minority -that is, clinician-researchers -and this role was seen to be distinct and was described in terms of attributes, processes and outcomes. Cusick (2000) suggests that the traditional belief that all clinicians should produce research needs to be reconsidered and further work is needed to examine the perspectives of clinicians who are not active in research. From the limited work in this area, these studies highlight the need to understand the research experience from the clinician's perspective in order to develop effective strategies that encourage and support research productivity in the profession.…”

Research Training as Occupational Socialization: Doing Research and Becoming Researchers

“…11, No. 2;2015 253 Cusick, 2000Cusick, , 2001Watts, 2009), doctoral research practice in professional-service fields such as sport pedagogy , and post-PhD professional research roles (e.g., Åkerlind , 2005Pelz & Andrews, 1976). …”

“…Broadly, researcher role development is conceived as a loose iterative process commencing with: (a) a person identifying a particular role as desirable; (b) engaging in activities and building relationships to develop the role in their lives; and (c) evaluating whether or not role acquisition was successful or a good life "fit" using feedback from their interactions with others and measures of career achievement (e.g., Cusick, 2000Cusick, , 2001. Although there is some directionality in role development, it is not a linear process because individuals go back and forth reflecting on their evolving identity in changing social contexts.…”