Download PDF
Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2023; 36(04): 271-278
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1762927
Review Article

Qualitative Research and Applications in Colorectal Surgery

C. Ann Vitous
1   Center for Health Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
,
Pasithorn A. Suwanabol
1   Center for Health Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
2   Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Traditionally employed in medical anthropologic and sociologic literature, qualitative methods are emerging as an essential component of clinical research as surgeons and researchers strive to optimize care informed by patient perspectives. Qualitative methods in health care–related research may be used to understand subjective experiences, beliefs, and concepts that are not captured using quantitative analyses and to gain in-depth knowledge of a specific context or culture. A qualitative approach may also be employed to explore under-researched problems and generate new ideas. Here, we provide an overview of aspects to consider when designing and conducting a qualitative research study.

Keywords

qualitative research - mixed methods - patient experience


Publication History

Article published online:
15 March 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Epstein RM, Street Jr RL. The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med 2011; 9 (02) 100-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lussiez A, Vitous CA, De Roo AC. et al. A multi-modal study examining long-term bowel, urinary, and sexual function after rectal cancer surgery. Am J Surg 2022; 224 (1 Pt B): 562-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rivard SJ, Vitous CA, Bamdad MC. et al. It's not fine: a photo-elicitation study of rectal cancer survivors' emotions and coping strategies. Surgery 2022; 171 (06) 1480-1485
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Vu JVT, Matusko N, Hendren S, Regenbogen SE, Hardiman KM. Patient-reported unmet needs in colorectal cancer survivors after treatment for curative intent. Dis Colon Rectum 2019; 62 (07) 815-822
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rivard S, Vitous CA, Bamdad M. et al. “I wish there had been resources.” A photo-elicitation study of rectal cancer survivorship care needs. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; (e-pub ahead of print) DOI: 10.1245/510434-022-13042-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mertens DM. Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Bogdan R, Biklen SK. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. 4th ed.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Polidano K, Chew-Graham CA, Farmer AD, Saunders B. Access to psychological support for young people following stoma surgery: exploring patients' and clinicians' perspectives. Qual Health Res 2021; 31 (03) 535-549
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Li M, Yeh YL, Sun H, Chang B, Chen LS. Community-based participatory research: a family health history-based colorectal cancer prevention program among Chinese Americans. J Cancer Educ 2020; 35 (03) 485-492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Coronado GD, Schneider JL, Petrik A, Rivelli J, Taplin S, Green BB. Implementation successes and challenges in participating in a pragmatic study to improve colon cancer screening: perspectives of health center leaders. Transl Behav Med 2017; 7 (03) 557-566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lau J, Lim TZ, Jianlin Wong G, Tan KK. The health belief model and colorectal cancer screening in the general population: a systematic review. Prev Med Rep 2020; 20: 101223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Buck C, Pini S, Lally P, Beeken RJ, Fisher A. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health behaviours of people living with and beyond breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer-a qualitative study. J Cancer Surviv 2022; (e-pub ahead of print) DOI: 10.1007/s11764-022-01234-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Byrnes ME, Varlamos CJ, Rivard SJ. et al. “You're used to being the one that can fix things…”: a qualitative snapshot of colorectal surgeons during COVID-19. Dis Colon Rectum 2020; 63 (12) 1575-1578
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rivard SJ, Vitous CA, Cocroft S. et al. Colorectal surgery patient perspectives on healthcare during the CoVID-19 pandemic. Am J Surg 2021; 222 (04) 759-765
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Al-Ghunaim TA, Johnson J, Biyani CS, O'Connor D. Psychological and occupational impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK surgeons: a qualitative investigation. BMJ Open 2021; 11 (04) e045699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Thorne S. Interpretive Description: Qualitative Research for Applied Practice. 2nd ed.. New York, NY: Routledge; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Johnson M, Long T, White A. Arguments for ‘British Pluralism’ in qualitative health research. J Adv Nurs 2001; 33 (02) 243-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kahlke RM. Generic qualitative approaches: pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. Int J Qual Methods 2014; 13 (01) 37-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Thompson Burdine J, Thorne S, Sandhu G. Interpretive description: a flexible qualitative methodology for medical education research. Med Educ 2021; 55 (03) 336-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Merriam SB. Qualitative Research in Education: A User's Guide. 2nd ed.. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. ‘Clear as mud’: toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 2003; 2 (02) 1-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Neergaard MA, Olesen F, Andersen RS, Sondergaard J. Qualitative description - the poor cousin of health research?. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009; 9 (01) 52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hunt MR. Strengths and challenges in the use of interpretive description: reflections arising from a study of the moral experience of health professionals in humanitarian work. Qual Health Res 2009; 19 (09) 1284-1292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract 2000; 39 (03) 124-130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ 2001; 322 (7294): 1115-1117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tracy SJ. Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq 2010; 16 (10) 837-851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Glaser BG. The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Soc Probl 1965; 12 (04) 436-445
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Russell CK, Gregory DM. Evaluation of qualitative research studies. Evid Based Nurs 2003; 6 (02) 36-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Busetto L, Wick W, Gumbinger C. How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurol Res Pract 2020; 2 (01) 14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Bernard HR. Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 5th ed.. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Clark VLP, Smith KC. Best Practices for Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences. 2011
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Kemper EA, Stringfield S, Teddlie C. Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. eds. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003: 273-296
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Miles M, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Spradley JP. The Ethnographic Interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1979
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res 2016; 26 (13) 1753-1760
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T. et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant 2018; 52 (04) 1893-1907
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York, NY: Routledge; 1967
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res 2007; 42 (04) 1758-1772
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Elfenbein DM, Schwarze ML. Qualitative research methods. In: Dimick J, Lubitz C. eds. Health Services Research. Success in Academic Surgery. Cham: Springer; 2020: 249-260
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Miles MB, Huberman AM. Early steps in analysis. In: Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994: 50-89
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Averill JB. Matrix analysis as a complementary analytic strategy in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res 2002; 12 (06) 855-866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Vitous CA, Ivatury SJ, Suwanabol PA. Value of qualitative research in colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 2021; 64 (12) 1444-1446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Eakin JM, Mykhalovskiy E. Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences. J Eval Clin Pract 2003; 9 (02) 187-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Schwandt TA, Halpern ES. Linking Auditing and Metaevaluation: Enhancing Quality in Applied Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1988
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Hammersley M, Atkinson P. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 2nd ed.. New York, NY: Routledge; 1983
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Sinclair LG. Young adults with permanent ileostomies: experiences during the first 4 years after surgery. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2009; 36 (03) 306-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Brown D, McCormack B. Determining factors that have an impact upon effective evidence-based pain management with older people, following colorectal surgery: an ethnographic study. J Clin Nurs 2006; 15 (10) 1287-1298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Moene M, Bergbom I, Skott C. Patients' existential situation prior to colorectal surgery. J Adv Nurs 2006; 54 (02) 199-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Rogers CR, Matthews P, Brooks E. et al. Barriers to and facilitators of recruitment of adult African American men for colorectal cancer research: an instrumental exploratory case study. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17 (05) e686-e694
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Beech N, Arber A, Faithfull S. Restoring a sense of wellness following colorectal cancer: a grounded theory. J Adv Nurs 2012; 68 (05) 1134-1144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 McMullan C, Pinkney TD, Jones LL. et al. Adapting to ulcerative colitis to try to live a ‘normal’ life: a qualitative study of patients' experiences in the Midlands region of England. BMJ Open 2017; 7 (08) e017544
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar