Exploring research barriers, priorities and perceptions among respiratory therapists in Asia: a cross-sectional study

Respiratory therapists (RT) are healthcare professionals who receive specialized training to apply evidence-based practices in managing pulmonary disorders. Despite global expansion of RT programs across Asia, there is only limited RT-specific research, compelling practitioners to often rely on research from other disciplines. This study explores research barriers among Asian RTs, investigates priority research topics, and examines perceptions regarding research involvement. A cross-sectional survey, adapted with permission from a previously used US instrument, was conducted between November 2024 and March 2025. The questionnaire comprised five sections with 45 items covering demographics, research involvement, training, perceived barriers, motivators, and perceptions, including a 4-item scale assessing RTs’ roles and engagement in research. The instrument underwent expert review for content relevance and clarity but was not formally validated. Licensed RTs currently practicing in academic, clinical, or combined roles within Asian countries were eligible, while non-licensed individuals, students, and RTs practicing outside Asia were excluded. Recruitment occurred through professional organizations, academic and clinical institutions, and social media networks. Of 402 respondents from 11 Asian countries, 54.2% were female and 48.0% held bachelor’s degrees. Staff therapists comprised 58.8%, with 43.3% working in adult critical care. Although 54.5% had formal research training, only 35.6% reported mentorship, and half spent < 1 h weekly on research. Formal training was linked to higher publication output (p ≤ 0.001). Major barriers included lack of training (n = 109) and limited opportunities (n = 70), while lung ultrasound (n = 85) was the top priority and improving patient outcomes (n = 125) the strongest motivator. The perception scale demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.76). Male gender was a negative predictor (OR = 0.05; p < 0.0001), whereas Master’s (OR = 21.37; p < 0.001), Doctorate degrees (OR = 37.04; p < 0.001), faculty positions (OR = 20.91; p = 0.004), research funding (OR = 25.02; p < 0.001), on-the-job training (OR = 36.07; p = 0.01), and self-directed learning (OR = 7.30; p = 0.03) significantly increased engagement. Limited training, time constraints, and lack of mentorship are key barriers to research among RTs in Asia, along with a gap between research priorities and available resources. Given the study’s cross-sectional design and reliance on self-reported data, the results should be interpreted cautiously. Nonetheless, the findings emphasize the need for institutional support, mentorship, and research development initiatives to strengthen evidence-based practice and improve patient outcomes across the region.