Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Gesundheitswesen 2023; 85(S 03): S189-S196
DOI: 10.1055/a-2129-6311
Originalarbeit

Conducting Qualitative Research under Pandemic Restrictions – Considerations, Challenges, and Benefits: A Methodological Field Report

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Anastasia Suslow 
1   Abteilung für Allgemeinmedizin (AM RUB), Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
,
Chantal Giehl 
1   Abteilung für Allgemeinmedizin (AM RUB), Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
,
Jannis Hergesell 
2   Forschungsnetzwerk Alterssicherung, Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund, Berlin, Germany
,
Horst Christian Vollmar 
1   Abteilung für Allgemeinmedizin (AM RUB), Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
,
Ina Carola Otte 
1   Abteilung für Allgemeinmedizin (AM RUB), Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The Covid-19 pandemic has a significant impact on professionals working in the medical area, with very high workload and tightened safety restrictions for physicians, nurses, caregivers, and patients. One of the main target participants in health services research are medical professionals. Their experiences contribute immensely to any research project aiming to improve delivery and quality of care. Furthermore, their input gives significantly greater insights into the handling of the pandemic and into what future improvements should be considered. In our research project ADAPTIVE (Impact of Digital Technologies in Palliative Care) we evaluate with qualitative research methods the impact of a web-based software on communication, teamwork, and lasting transformations in accountability in multidisciplinary teams (e. g., medication and independent decisions). In this paper, we discuss the challenges and benefits of conducting a qualitative research project under pandemic conditions by illustrating the progress of ADAPTIVE.

Methods ADAPTIVE started in March 2020 and ended in August 2021. For data collection, we interviewed 26 participants about using a web-based program to facilitate the exchange of patient information in multidisciplinary teams in outpatient palliative care in Germany (mainly physicians and nurses). However, due to emerging hygiene regulations, corona-related restrictions, and the ongoing workload of medical professionals, the recruiting and interviewing process were challenging. Hence, we had to modify the original study design of two face-to-face interviews per participant and a focus group discussion into one telephone interview. The focus groups were cancelled.

Results We discussed several adjustments to the data collection. However, the privacy policies of different clinics, participants’ lack of experience with video calls, and a potential poor internet connectivity eliminated the option of digital video interviewing. Therefore, we interviewed 21 participants by telephone and only five face-to-face. Further, the focus group discussions initially planned had to be dropped since a simultaneous gathering of the participants was not possible due to several reasons. Nonetheless, we obtained many insights into the usage of digital support systems in palliative care by conducting 26 interviews, allowing us to complete the research project.

Discussion Telephone interviews come with limitations. Firstly, it may be difficult for participants to establish a trusting relationship with the interviewer. Secondly, non-verbal communication is lost during a telephone interview. However, expanding the survey methodology to include telephone interviews gave us the option of allowing us to expand the recruitment nationwide and overcome issues successfully.

Conclusions Recruitment and data collection showed to be more time-consuming under pandemic circumstances, and further survey methods such as focus groups were nearly impossible. However, a qualitative research design offers greater flexibility when adapting study designs.

Key words

Qualitative Research - Covid-19 - Pandemic - Research Process - Data Collection - Interview


Publication History

Article published online:
26 September 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Strauss AL. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: University Press. 2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Schnack H, Lubasch JS, Zinkevich A. et al. Versorgungsforschung in Deutschland in Zeiten von COVID-19: Wie beeinflusst die Pandemie Forschungsprozesse, Methoden und die persönliche Situation von Forschenden? Eine Online-Befragung. Gesundheitswesen 2023; 85: 495-504 DOI: 10.1055/a-2055-0904.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Vindrola-Padros C, Chisnall G, Cooper S. et al. Carrying Out Rapid Qualitative Research During a Pandemic: Emerging Lessons From COVID-19. Qual Health Res 2020; 30: 2192-2204 DOI: 10.1177/1049732320951526.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Begerow A, Michaelis U, Gaidys U. Wahrnehmungen von Pflegenden im Bereich der Intensivpflege während der COVID-19-Pandemie. Pflege 2020; 33: 229-236 DOI: 10.1024/1012-5302/a000744.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lum HD, Padala KP, Dean KT. et al. Psychogeriatric research during COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative analysis of participant views. Int Psychogeriatr 2020; 32: 1357-1360 DOI: 10.1017/S1041610220001179.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Reichertz J. Die coronabedingte Krise der qualitativen Sozialforschung. Soziologie 2021; 50: 313-335
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Suslow A, Giehl C, Hergesell J. et al. Impact of information and communication software on multiprofessional team collaboration in outpatient palliative care – a qualitative study on providers’ perspectives. BMC Palliat Care 2023; 22: 19 DOI: 10.1186/s12904-023-01141-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Giehl C, Suslow A, Hergesell J. et al Digital information systems in outpatient palliative care and their effect on caregivers’ latitude and quality of care – A qualitative study. Nursing and Palliative Care 2023; DOI: 10.15761/NPC.1000223. (in press)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kvale S. InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. SAGE Publications Inc; 1996
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Helfferich C. Die Qualität Qualitativer Daten. Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer Interviews. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag; 2011
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Mirza M, Siebert S, Pratt A. et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recruitment to clinical research studies in rheumatology. Musculoskeletal Care 2021; 1-5 DOI: 10.1002/msc.1561.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Rose S, Hartnett J, Pillai S. Healthcare worker’s emotions, perceived stressors and coping mechanisms during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS One 2021; 16: e0254252 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254252.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Choosing Among Five Approaches. 4. Aufl. London: SAGE Publications Inc; 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Tremblay S, Castiglione S, Audet L-A. et al. Conducting Qualitative Research to Respond to COVID-19 Challenges: Reflections for the Present and Beyond. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2021; 20: 160940692110096 DOI: 10.1177/16094069211009679.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Behnke J, Baur N, Behnke N. Empirische Methoden der Politikwissenschaft. 2. Aufl. Paderborn: Schöningh; 2010
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Basics of qualitative research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc; 1990
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Marshall MN. Sampling for qualitative research. Fam Pract 1996; 13: 522-525 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/13.6.522.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Akremi L. Stichprobenziehung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. In: Baur N, Blasius J, Hrsg. Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden; 2014: 265-282
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Strübing J, Hirschauer S, Ayaß R. et al. Gütekriterien qualitativer Sozialforschung. Ein Diskussionsanstoß. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 2018; 47: 83-100 DOI: 10.1515/zfsoz-2018-1006.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Vollmar HC, Kramer U, Müller H. et al. Digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen – Rahmenbedingungen zur Nutzung in Versorgung, Strukturentwicklung und Wissenschaft – Positionspapier der AG Digital Health des DNVF. Gesundheitswesen 2017; 79: 1080-1092 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-122233.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kramer U, Borges U, Fischer F. et al. DNVF-Memorandum – Gesundheits- und Medizin-Apps (GuMAs). Gesundheitswesen 2019; 81: 850-854 DOI: 10.1055/a-1038-9173.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Padala PR, Jendro AM, Gauss CH. et al. Participant and Caregiver Perspectives on Clinical Research During Covid-19 Pandemic. J Am Geriatr Soc 2020; 68: E14-E18 DOI: 10.1111/jgs.16500.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Teti M, Schatz E, Liebenberg L. Methods in the Time of COVID-19: The Vital Role of Qualitative Inquiries. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2020; 19: 160940692092096 DOI: 10.1177/1609406920920962.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Bengry A. Accessing the Research Field. In: Flick U, Hrsg. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications Inc; 2018: 99-117
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Morgan DL, Hoffman K. Focus Groups. In: Flick U, Hrsg. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications Inc; 2018
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Roulston K, Choi M. Qualitative Interviews. In: Flick U, Hrsg. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications Inc; 2018: 233-249
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Habermann-Horstmeier L. Die Situation von Menschen mit geistiger Behinderung in Zeiten der COVID-19- Pandemie aus Sicht der Betroffenen, ihrer Angehörigen und Betreuungskräfte. Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Public-Health-Studie. 2020
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Krämer K, Pfizenmayer A. Interne Kommunikation in Zeiten von Covid-19. wie die Pandemie die interne Kommunikation verändert hat – eine qualitative Studie. Working Paper in Applied Linguisticts. Winterthur: ZHAW Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften 2020; DOI: 10.21256/ZHAW-2393.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dehl T, Sauerbrey U, Dreier-Wolfgramm A. et al. Intersectoral care management for older people with cognitive impairment during and after hospital stays intersec-CM: study protocol for a process evaluation within a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2021; 22: 72 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05021-1.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Lichtblau K, Fritsch M, Millack A. Abschnitt A – Digitalisierung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft in Deutschland. In: Digital-Atlas Deutschland. Überblick über die Digitalisierung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft sowie von KMU, NGOs, Bildungseinrichtungen sowie der Zukunft der Arbeit in Deutschland. 2018: 9-90
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Golinelli D, Boetto E, Carullo G. et al. Adoption of Digital Technologies in Health Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review of Early Scientific Literature. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e22280 DOI: 10.2196/22280.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Star SL, Strauss A. Layers of Silence, Arenas of Voice: The Ecology of Visible and Invisible Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 1999; 8: 9-30 DOI: 10.1023/A:1008651105359.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hergesell J. Technische Assistenzen in der Altenpflege. Eine historisch-soziologische Analyse zu den Ursachen und Folgen von Pflegeinnovationen. Weinheim/Basel: Juventa; 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Flick U. Triangulation in Data Collection. In: Flick U, Hrsg. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection. SAGE Publications Inc; 2018: 527-544
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Marhefka S, Lockhart E, Turner D. Achieve Research Continuity During Social Distancing by Rapidly Implementing Individual and Group Videoconferencing with Participants: Key Considerations, Best Practices, and Protocols. AIDS Behav 2020; 24: 1983-1989 DOI: 10.1007/s10461-020-02837-x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar