Paul Brown

Using Joint Interviews in a Narrative-Based Study on Illness Experiences

Researchers are increasingly recognizing the usefulness of using joint interviews in research on illness experiences. However, there is limited discussion of joint interviews as a data collection method and of the factors that influence the choice to conduct individual or joint interviews. Although there are several advantages and disadvantages of both methods, the reasons that underpin the choice to use joint interviews are often not discussed in detail in the literature. Drawing from a narrative-based study on the experiences of living with motor neuron disease, we present joint interviews as a method sensitive both to the shared experience of illness and to the multiple perspectives around illness. Using interview excerpts, we discuss how through the use of joint interviews researchers can explore the intersubjective and heteroglossic nature of illness experiences. We argue that using joint interviews can offer valuable information about how couples coconstruct meaning and share experiences.

This is not the end, nor is it the beginning—but it is the end of the beginning—getting to grips with the research process

This is the second article in the series. The first article provided a clear rationale for the integration of research into clinical practice. This article will build on this by illustrating practically how to get to grips with research terminology and to begin thinking about, planning and doing research. The purpose of this article is to provide a basic introduction to research and to present a guide to the practical stages involved in undertaking research. First the article will consider a rationale for undertaking health research. Second the nature of the research will be explored by focusing into two distinct approaches—experimental type research and naturalistic inquiry. This will give the reader a broad perspective of research design. The different levels of research training will then be described considering the relevance to clinical practitioners. The article will then focus on defining and structuring research questions, choosing a method (or methods) and preparing a research proposal.

The development and introduction of a written post-radiotherapy information leaflet for prostate cancer patients [Abstract]

Background With rapidly dividing lesions such as non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), repopulation of tumour cells during breaks in radiotherapy treatment is recognised as a prohibiting factor for effective tumour eradication. To address this, NICE guidelines advocate continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) as the standard regimen for the treatment of suitable stage I and II NSCLC. The CHART regimen is, however, more intensive than conventional radiotherapy fractionation and is associated with increased risk of treatment morbidity and radiation induced complications. One complication associated with radiation treatment of lung tissue is radiation induced pneumonitis (RP). This systematic review of literature aimed to compare the incidence and severity of RP in patients receiving CHART with patients receiving conventional fractionation radiotherapy treatment. Method A systematic review of current evidence-based literature was employed, with the scope of the study extending to include a variety of databases such as Medline, PubMED and the Cochrane Library. The evidence was then filtered in order to meet inclusion/exclusion criteria and relevance criteria. Findings A total of 10 studies met the criteria for inclusion in the final review. The main reasons for exclusion of studies included lack of relevance, no provision of quantitative or qualitative data with respect to incidence of RP or evidence of methodological flaws. The review showed decreased incidence of RP amongst patients receiving CHART compared with patients receiving conventional fractionation radiotherapy (13.2% to 19.7% respectively). The study also highlighted several key predicative factors for RP including Mean Lung Dose, volume of lung receiving a dose greater than 20Gy, gender, age and smoking habits. Conclusion A range of variables have an effect on the incidence of RP, of which treatment regimen is one. However, as other predicative factors are present multivariate models would need to be constructed in order to provide an accurate assessment of RP risk.