(107) Rebuilding a Culture of Research

Background: Over the last decade, our multidisciplinary team has grown from 15 caregivers and researchers to 34, with periods of significant turnover. Our patient population has more than doubled, from 236 people with CF (pwCF) in 2011 to more than 500 in 2021. At the same time, the reach of research has also doubled, with less than 100 pwCF participating in 2011 to 228 in 2021 (44%). With this amount of growth and change, we sought to reflect and refocus on a culture of research at our center. We aim to measure current research and clinical team members’ knowledge in order to enhance a culture of research at our center, resulting in improved research impact and cohesion between teams.

Methods: This is a joint effort between both the clinical quality improvement (CQI) and research quality improvement (eQUIP) teams. In order to assess the multidisciplinary team members’ current state of knowledge about goals and processes, each discipline contributed to a questionnaire we developed. The questions administered to the clinical team asked about the types of research studies available for pwCF, the number of pwCF that participate in research, and the views of clinical team members on the importance of research. The questions administered to the research team addressed best practices for clinic visits and the roles and responsibilities of different clinical team members. The overall results were presented at a team meeting, and each QI team is in the process of developing strategies to address issues identified from the questionnaires.

Results: The questionnaires were completed by 94% of the multidisciplinary team members (n=32). The research team had an average knowledge score of 91%, indicating a good understanding of clinical team processes. The clinical team acknowledged the importance of research, with scores of 7/10 and higher, but lacked knowledge about the scope of research studies and the number of research participants (average knowledge score=57%). Both teams showed a need to get to know each other, with both teams failing to identify a member from the other team (eQUIP=63%, CQI=61%). With this data, the first project was to design fun yet informative bulletin boards for both the research and clinical teams. Each board contains educational information, such as a research study spotlight, recommended health screenings for pwCF, a “get to know” team member highlight, and contact information with photos, and is updated on a two-week rotation.

Conclusions: These results highlighted that our teams need to work on learning about each other and individual roles on the team. Isolation protocols and staffing changes during the pandemic have made it more difficult for staff to learn about each other. The research team fared better in their knowledge of clinical processes, likely due to requiring some level of clinical knowledge for enrollment into clinical trials. While all of our CF providers are involved in clinical research, not all of the clinical care ancillary staff are, resulting in a low level of knowledge about clinical research and its impact on our patient population. We believe that through education about each team member’s role and team processes, we can create a collaborative and cohesive culture of research, ultimately resulting in the same common goal to care for pwCF on a path to a cure.

Acknowledgements: CQI team: S.Brayshaw, C.Trout, S.Gibbons, C.Barboa, V.Niedzinski, C.Sorensen, K.Hisert. eQUIP team: A.McCarthy, P.Smith, R.Plomondon, E.Armantrout, R.Janney, S.Caceres.

References: