The intensive care research coordinator position in Australia and New Zealand: Self-perception of professional development priorities and “best” and “worst” aspects of the position. A cross-sectional web-based study

SummaryBackgroundMany intensive care units (ICU) research coordinators (RCs) work in isolation with limited access to professional development and peer support.Aims(1) To map professional development priorities and “best” and “worst” aspects of the ICU RC role. (2) To compare results of “best” and “worst” aspects to a similar 2004 study.MethodsOn-line study conducted from July 2009 to October 2009. Respondents scored 26 individual items related to professional development and described in free text “best” and “worst” aspects.Results56 RCs participated. Maintaining high ethical standards for the research participant was ranked the highest priority. RCs had considerable interest but less confidence in completing own research.The “best” and “worst” aspects exposed three thematic clusters: work conditions; work environment; work role. Most often recorded notations were Work Conditions for “best” and work environment for “worst” aspects.ConclusionRCs judge adherence to international research guidelines the most important pre-requisite for the position and wish involvement in research design and dissemination. With little change from 2004, inadequate peer support and unsatisfactory employment conditions constituted most of the “worst” aspects. Autonomy and working in the ICU team are the “best” aspects of the role in addition to the intellectual stimulation of research.