J Korean Acad Nurs Adm.  2016 Jan;22(1):46-56. 10.11111/jkana.2016.22.1.46.

Action Research in Hospital Settings: A Literature Review of International Nursing Journals

• Moon JE
• Song MO
• Kim HY
• Park HY
• Kim EA
• Kim YM
• Jang KS

• KMID: 2153277
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2016.22.1.46

Abstract

PURPOSE
Purpose of this study was to identify major trends of action research from 2006 to 2013 and suggest directions for activating and advancing domestic action research in nursing.
METHODS
A review was made of 118 action research studies in hospital settings reported in international journals. Search from PubMed, Ovid, and CINHAL was done using analysis criteria developed by the researchers. General and methodological characteristics and focus on changing outcomes of action research were analyzed.
RESULTS
The major group of researchers belonged to colleges/universities (40.7%). Methods included use of qualitative methods (61.0%), research questions (24.6%), and use of theoretical models (35.6%). Prevalent data collection methods were interviews (20.2%), and 48.3% showed more than a 1-cycle process including spiral circulation structure. Focus of changing outcomes of the 56 papers including more than 1-cycle were practice (66.1%), environment (8.9%), client-nurse (7.1%).
CONCLUSION
Trends in action research in nursing were identified providing necessary reasons to increase action research in nursing as follows: needs of various researchers including stakeholders as well as healthcare providers, various research designs including unconstrained reflection and writing, specific presentation of adapted theoretical models and action strategies, and quality assurance for validity and reliability of research processes and outcomes.

Keyword

Action research; Hospital; Review; Research trend

MeSH Terms

Data Collection
Health Personnel
Health Services Research*
Humans
Models, Theoretical
Nursing*
Reproducibility of Results
Research Design
Writing

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Literature selection process in this study.

Reference

1. Lee YS, Kim YC, Lee HG, Kim YM, Cho DJ, Cho JS. Action research. Seoul: Hakjisa;2005. p. 21–42.

2. Soh KL, Davidson P, Leslie G, Rahman ABA. Action research studies in the intensive care setting: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011; 48(2):258–268. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.09.014.

3. Williamson GR, Bellman L, Webster J. Action research in nursing and healthcare. 1st ed. In : Jang KS, Kim HY, Kim EA, Kim YM, Moon JE, Park H, editors. translators. Seoul: Hyunmoonsa.

4. Koshy E, Koshy V, Waterman H. Action research in healthcare. New Delhi: Sage;2011.

5. Kim MO. Utilities and application of action research in Korean Social Welfare Research. Korean J Soc Welf. 2009; 61(3):179–204.

6. Heyns T. A journey towards emancipatory practice development [dissertation]. South Africa: University of South Africa;2008.

7. Zuber-Skerritt O, Fletcher M. The quality of an action research thesis in the social sciences. Qual Assur Educ. 2007; 15(4):413–436. DOI: 10.1108/09684880710829983.

8. Munn-Giddings C, McVicar A, Smith L. Systematic review of the uptake and design of action research in published nursing research, 2000-2005. J Res Nurs. 2008; 13(6):465–477. DOI: 10.1177/1744987108090297.

9. Kim YM, Jang KS. An action research study on the effects of an action learning-based nursing professionalism course for nursing students. J Korean Educ. 2014; 41(4):123–147.

10. Kim H, Kim YH. An action research to improve fundamental nursing practice course - Designing college courses model. J Korean Acad Fundam Nurs. 2015; 22(2):169–179. DOI: 10.7739/jkafn.2015.22.2.169.

11. Jang KS, Kim HY, Kim EA, Kim YM, Moon JE, Park H, et al. A journey to action research in clinical nursing context. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2013; 19(1):95–107. DOI: 10.11111/jkana.2013.19.1.95.

12. Kim B. Action research for parent empowerment of married immigrant women. J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2013; 22(1):65–76. DOI: 10.12934/jkpmhn.2013.22.1.65.

13. Choe MA, Bang KS, Kim NC, Kim SJ, Kim YS, Kim HS, et al. Nursing Research Trends Analysis Using 2011 East Asian Forum of Nursing Scholars (EAFONS) Abstract. J Korean Acad Soc Nurs Edu. 2012; 18(2):332–342. DOI: 10.5977/jkasne.2012.18.2.332.

14. Kim HS. Conceptual domains in nursing: A framework for theoretical analysis. In : Kim HS, editor. The nature of theoretical thinking in nursing. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer Pub. Co.;2010. p. 59–84.

15. Krugman M, Heggem L, Kinney LJ, Frueh M. Longitudinal charge nurse leadership development and evaluation. J Nurs Adm. 2013; 43(9):438–446. DOI: 10.1097/NNA.0b013e3182a23b26.

16. Havens DS, Wood SO, Leeman J. Improving nursing practice and patient care: Building capacity with appreciative inquiry. J Nurs Adm. 2006; 36(10):463–470.

17. Kang JY, So KH. Education action research in Korea. Asian J Educ. 2011; 12(3):197–224.

18. Waterman H, Tillen D, Dickson R, De Koning K. Action research: A systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2001; 5(23):iii–157. DOI: 10.3310/hta5230.

19. Hope KW, Waterman HA. Praiseworthy pragmatism? Validity and action research. J Adv Nurs. 2003; 44(2):120–127. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02777.x.

20. Coghlan D, Casey M. Action research from the inside: Issues and challenges in doing action research in your own hospital. J Adv Nurs. 2001; 35(5):674–682. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01899.x.

21. Rigour and quality. In : Koch T, Kralik D, editors. Participatory action research in health care. Oxford; Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub;2006. p. 137–149.

22. Zuber-Skerritt O. Action research in higher education: Examples and reflections. London: Kogan Page;1992.

23. Waterman H. Embracing ambiguities and valuing ourselves: Issues of validity in action research. J Adv Nurs. 1998; 28(1):101–105.