Intensive care specialists' knowledge, attitudes, and professional use of published research evidence: A mail-out questionnaire survey of appropriate use of research evidence in clinical practice

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippa T. Heighes ◽  
Gordon S. Doig
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet E. Squires ◽  
Laura D. Aloisio ◽  
Jeremy M. Grimshaw ◽  
Kainat Bashir ◽  
Kristin Dorrance ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Susanne Heiwe ◽  
Eva Johansson ◽  
Kerstin Nilsson-Kajermo ◽  
Karin Säflund ◽  
Ann Ödlund Olin

Background: Education is a commonly used intervention in the development of evidence-based practice (EBP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of an educational intervention on healthcare professionals’ perceived skills in finding, reviewing, and using research evidence in clinical practice. A further aim was to identify potential determinants for the outcome.Methods and Findings: A three-day course in EBP was designed for registered nurses, medical social workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and dieticians. The Developing Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (DEBP) questionnaire was administered before and six months after the intervention (N = 274). Non-parametric statistics were used. The results showed an overall effect on ability to find research evidence (p = .0005) and ability to review research evidence (p = .0005), whereas there was no overall effect on use of research evidence in clinical practice (p = .18). However, some subgroups showed a significant improvement over time, for example, those whose profession was nursing or midwifery and those who had experience using evidence-based practice prior to the educational intervention.Conclusions: The results showed that a three-day course in EBP improved the participants’ ability to find and review research evidence, but it did not have an overall effect on the use of research evidence in clinical practice.


2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 239-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Innvær ◽  
Gunn Vist ◽  
Mari Trommald ◽  
Andrew Oxman

Objectives: The empirical basis for theories and common wisdom regarding how to improve appropriate use of research evidence in policy decisions is unclear. One source of empirical evidence is interview studies with policy-makers. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence from interview studies of facilitators of, and barriers to, the use of research evidence by health policy-makers. Methods: We searched multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, Sociofile, PsychLit, PAIS, IBSS, IPSA and HealthStar in June 2000, hand-searched key journals and personally contacted investigators. We included interview studies with health policy-makers that covered their perceptions of the use of research evidence in health policy decisions at a national, regional or organisational level. Two reviewers independently assessed the relevance of retrieved articles, described the methods of included studies and extracted data that were summarised in tables and analysed qualitatively. Results: We identified 24 studies that met our inclusion criteria. These studies included a total of 2041 interviews with health policy-makers. Assessments of the use of evidence were largely descriptive and qualitative, focusing on hypothetical scenarios or retrospective perceptions of the use of evidence in relation to specific cases. Perceived facilitators of, and barriers to, the use of evidence varied. The most commonly reported facilitators were personal contact (13/24), timely relevance (13/24), and the inclusion of summaries with policy recommendations (11/24). The most commonly reported barriers were absence of personal contact (11/24), lack of timeliness or relevance of research (9/24), mutual mistrust (8/24) and power and budget struggles (7/24). Conclusions: Interview studies with health policy-makers provide only limited support for commonly held beliefs about facilitators of, and barriers to, their use of evidence, and raise questions about commonsense proposals for improving the use of research for policy decisions. Two-way personal communication, the most common suggestion, may improve the appropriate use of research evidence, but it might also promote selective (inappropriate) use of research evidence.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
Katrina Fulcher-Rood ◽  
Anny Castilla-Earls ◽  
Jeff Higginbotham

Purpose The current investigation is a follow-up from a previous study examining child language diagnostic decision making in school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to examine the SLPs' perspectives regarding the use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in their clinical work. Method Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs who previously participated in an earlier study by Fulcher-Rood et al. 2018). SLPs were asked questions regarding their definition of EBP, the value of research evidence, contexts in which they implement scientific literature in clinical practice, and the barriers to implementing EBP. Results SLPs' definitions of EBP differed from current definitions, in that SLPs only included the use of research findings. SLPs seem to discuss EBP as it relates to treatment and not assessment. Reported barriers to EBP implementation were insufficient time, limited funding, and restrictions from their employment setting. SLPs found it difficult to translate research findings to clinical practice. SLPs implemented external research evidence when they did not have enough clinical expertise regarding a specific client or when they needed scientific evidence to support a strategy they used. Conclusions SLPs appear to use EBP for specific reasons and not for every clinical decision they make. In addition, SLPs rely on EBP for treatment decisions and not for assessment decisions. Educational systems potentially present other challenges that need to be considered for EBP implementation. Considerations for implementation science and the research-to-practice gap are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document