Exploring recruitment issues in stroke research: a qualitative study of nurse researchers’ experiences
Intended for healthcare professionals
Recruitment Previous     Next

Exploring recruitment issues in stroke research: a qualitative study of nurse researchers’ experiences

Leigh Boxall Lead research practitioner, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, Devon, UK
Anthony Hemsley Consultant physician, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, Devon, UK
Nicola White Lecturer in translational medicine, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, UK

Aim To explore the practice of experienced stroke nurse researchers to understand the issues they face in recruiting participants.

Background Participant recruitment is one of the greatest challenges in conducting clinical research, with many trials failing due to recruitment problems. Stroke research is a particularly difficult area in which to recruit; however various strategies can improve participation.

Discussion Analysis revealed three main types of problems for recruiting participants to stroke research: those related to patients, those related to the nurse researcher, and those related to the study itself. Impairments affecting capacity to consent, the acute recruitment time frame of most stroke trials, paternalism by nurse researchers, and low public awareness were especially pertinent.

Conclusion The disabling nature of a stroke, which often includes functional and cognitive impairments, and the acute stage of illness at which patients are appropriate for many trials, make recruiting patients particularly complex and challenging.

Implications for practice An awareness of the issues surrounding the recruitment of stroke patients may help researchers in designing and conducting trials. Future work is needed to address the complexities of obtaining informed consent when patient capacity is compromised.

Nurse Researcher. 23, 5, 8-14. doi: 10.7748/nr.23.5.8.s3

Peer review

This article has been subject to double-blind review and has been checked using antiplagiarism software

Conflict of interest

None declared

Received: 19 October 2014

Accepted: 09 June 2015

Want to read more?

RCNi-Plus
Already have access? Log in

or

3-month trial offer for £5.25/month

Subscribe today and save 50% on your first three months
RCNi Plus users have full access to the following benefits:
  • Unlimited access to all 10 RCNi Journals
  • RCNi Learning featuring over 175 modules to easily earn CPD time
  • NMC-compliant RCNi Revalidation Portfolio to stay on track with your progress
  • Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
  • A customisable dashboard with over 200 topics
Subscribe

Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now


Are you a student? Our student subscription has content especially for you.
Find out more