Blog – Research and the Lone Worker

There are few jobs where policies shape your day quite as much as in research. Protocols, SOPs, ethics objectives, amendments, deviations, Serious Adverse Events, Good Clinical Practice — the list is endless. But one area that often gets less attention is what happens when researchers leave the safety of their desks and venture out to participants’ homes. That’s where a “lone worker policy” comes in.

During my 25 years as a Community Psychiatric Nurse, I saw plenty of creative ways to keep staff safe. Before mobiles there was the good old fashioned pegboards where you slid your name across to show whether you were in or out. Then phone call to the team secretary on arrival and again when you left became popular later being replaced with more high-tech options like sending coded text messages to a central number. The idea was simple enough — until you forgot to cancel one. Then the system would spring into action: alarms would go off, managers would start ringing, and in theory the police could even get involved. All while you were at home, halfway through your dinner, wondering why your phone wouldn’t stop buzzing. From memory that didn’t last too long.

Each of these systems had their strengths, and each had its quirks. Some were simple but easy to forget. Others were clever but perhaps a bit too complicated for everyday use. What they all showed, though, was that people genuinely cared about keeping staff safe — even if the methods sometimes needed fine-tuning.

This all resurfaced for me recently when my current employer reviewed its health and safety policies. These days, I only occasionally — perhaps three or four times a year — visit participants in their own home, alongside their next of kin. My role is usually to assess capacity, check everything is in order, have them sign consent forms, and complete a few rating scales. On the face of it, the risks seem fairly minimal. But having been involved in two road traffic accidents — both in very rural areas, and both while out on clinical duties — I’ve learned the hard way that risks don’t always come from patients or participants. Sometimes they come from a startled deer (not as startled as me!) or from another distracted driver.

The policy my current employer uses is neither better nor worse than the ones I’ve seen before and thankfully erring on the “simple is better” approach. What did catch my attention, though, was the reluctance to allow personal devices to be used as part of this policy with no explanation as to why when asked. This surprised me, because not only are personal phones just as effective, but evidence suggests they can actually be more reliable for both staff and employers. I’ve had the same mobile number for about 15 years, and it’s the one listed on all my team’s contact literature. It’s never been an issue. There’s no patient or participant data stored on my phone, so confidentiality isn’t a concern. So, being a clinician and researcher at heart, I thought: why not treat this like any other clinical question — and go and look for the evidence?

Now, this is a blog, so I won’t bore you with references, but trust me: there’s a surprising amount of research out there. Industry has been looking at this for 10–15 years under the term BYOD — Bring Your Own Device. Before that, it probably wasn’t such a hot topic.

After all, back in the days when calls cost 50p a minute, there was every incentive to demand a “work mobile.”

But as contracts became cheaper and smartphones turned into everyday essentials, the case for personal devices grew stronger.

One issue that consistently came up in the evidence was this: familiarity and ease of use enhance safety. Workers already know their own device works. That means quicker check-ins, smoother updates, and less fumbling when trying to call for help. Today we use our phones as naturally as we breathe — or maybe as naturally as we drive (though given my track record with deer, I’ll stick with breathing). In routine situations, logging in and out of visits on your own phone takes no thought at all. And if a risk is perceived, that familiarity could provide vital seconds.

Other studies highlight practical benefits too. Your personal device is more likely to be charged, carried, and accessible. It reduces the equipment burden, which, if you’ve ever tried juggling clipboards, consent forms, and a spare phone, you’ll know is no small thing.

The benefits don’t stop with safety. Surveys suggest BYOD can increase engagement, improve morale, strengthen teamwork, and boost efficiency. In my own team, for example, WhatsApp groups are set up for non-clinical communication. When we attend conferences, particularly abroad, we use them to share travel details, organise meet-ups, and generally keep track of each other. We can “pin” colleagues on maps and locate in unfamiliar places and although not officially a safety system, in practice it provides one.

Employers also stand to gain. There are obvious cost savings from not having to buy and maintain a fleet of work mobiles that may rarely be used. More importantly, evidence suggests that when staff use their own devices, they’re more likely to follow lone worker policies consistently. Real-time monitoring can also be improved, since GPS and location services on personal phones provide accurate, up-to-the-minute visibility. Another small point, but one no one can deny, is the environmental benefits of not duplicating hardware.

And maybe that’s the bigger point. Just like in research, where evidence and feedback are central, safety policies work best when they’re shaped by the people they’re designed to protect. After all, the fanciest lone worker system in the world won’t help if nobody remembers to use it.

Bernie McInally

Author

Bernie McInally is a Clinical Studies Officer at NHS Lothian and the Neuroprogressive and Dementia Network. Bernie’s background is in Nursing, working in Mental Health and with Older People. He retired from full time NHS clinical work, and is now back working in Clinical Research supporting delivery of the Enabling Research in Care Homes (ENRICH) Scotland. He is passionate about research delivery, and opening access to people in all communities.