scholarly journals A Tool to Assess the Trustworthiness of Evidence-Based Point-of-Care Information for Health Care Professionals (CAPOCI): Design and Validation Study (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerlinde Lenaerts ◽  
Geertruida E Bekkering ◽  
Martine Goossens ◽  
Leen De Coninck ◽  
Nicolas Delvaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Likert Scale ◽  
Ordinal Scale ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Information

BACKGROUND User-friendly information at the point of care for health care professionals should be well structured, rapidly accessible, comprehensive, and trustworthy. The reliability of information and the associated methodological process must be clear. There is no standard tool to evaluate the trustworthiness of such point-of-care (POC) information. OBJECTIVE We aim to develop and validate a new tool for assessment of trustworthiness of evidence-based POC resources to enhance the quality of POC resources and facilitate evidence-based practice. METHODS We designed the Critical Appraisal of Point-of-Care Information (CAPOCI) tool based on the criteria important for assessment of trustworthiness of POC information, reported in a previously published review. A group of health care professionals and methodologists (the authors of this paper) defined criteria for the CAPOCI tool in an iterative process of discussion and pilot testing until consensus was reached. In the next step, all criteria were subject to content validation with a Delphi study. We invited an international panel of 10 experts to rate their agreement with the relevance and wording of the criteria and to give feedback. Consensus was reached when 70% of the experts agreed. When no consensus was reached, we reformulated the criteria based on the experts’ comments for a next round of the Delphi study. This process was repeated until consensus was reached for each criterion. In a last step, the interrater reliability of the CAPOCI tool was calculated with a 2-tailed Kendall tau correlation coefficient to quantify the agreement between 2 users who piloted the CAPOCI tool on 5 POC resources. Two scoring systems were tested: a 3-point ordinal scale and a 7-point Likert scale. RESULTS After validation, the CAPOCI tool was designed with 11 criteria that focused on methodological quality and author-related information. The criteria assess authorship, literature search, use of preappraised evidence, critical appraisal of evidence, expert opinions, peer review, timeliness and updating, conflict of interest, and commercial support. Interrater agreement showed substantial agreement between 2 users for scoring with the 3-point ordinal scale (τ=.621, <i>P</i>&lt;.01) and scoring with the 7-point Likert scale (τ=.677, <i>P</i>&lt;.01). CONCLUSIONS The CAPOCI tool may support validation teams in the assessment of trustworthiness of POC resources. It may also provide guidance for producers of POC resources.

scholarly journals Introducing evidence based public health practice through a journal club for public health officers in Somaliland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jibril I. M. Handuleh ◽  
Abdirahman A. Sulleiman ◽  
Yusuf S. Yusuf ◽  
Hayat Mohamed ◽  
Daniel Fekadu Wolde-Giorgis
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Journal Club ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Health Practitioner ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Journal Clubs

Evidence based public health is one of the basic training tools of public health students and young officers in decision making. The training tools for early career specialists and trainees in public health is journal clubs (JC). It keeps the knowledge of professionals up to date and assist them in receiving information to design, plan, implement health care services, policies and strategies. The intention of the JC team was to raise awareness of methods for public health literature search, appraising it and applying this knowledge in their daily practices. A senior public health practitioner in Somaliland (the corresponding author) invited medical students and residents to have JCs as a part of their training. They did not accept the offer so the organizer invited practicing junior public health professionals instead. The JC team members were a general practitioner and 3 public health workers from Ministry of Health, public hospital physician, public health school and field public health officer. A weekly or twice weekly journal club took place to train them in critical appraisal. This continued for 15 months in a hybrid mentorship for the health care professionals. The team mentor selected a paper for discussion. Mentees choose a study design appraisal tool from the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) that matched the study to present. In the process of appraisal, a team member led the discussion using the checklist. The mentees presented their critical appraisal either orally or via a presentation. The checklist and paper were compared for assessing the study design and structure of the paper of the week. This approach of empowering junior public health officers in Somalia is a way forward for encouraging the professionals to use evidence based practice in their daily practices. This will improve their selection of research tools and translating the scientific work into their practice and services.

scholarly journals An Evidence-Based, Nursing Handover Standard for a Multisite Public Hospital in Switzerland: Web-Based, Modified Delphi Study

JMIR Nursing ◽  
10.2196/17876 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. e17876
Author(s):  
Nadine Tacchini-Jacquier ◽  
Hélène Hertzog ◽  
Kilian Ambord ◽  
Peter Urben ◽  
Pierre Turini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Public Hospital ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Evidence Based Nursing

Background Ineffective communication procedures create openings for errors when health care professionals fail to transfer complete, consistent information. Deficient or absent clinical handovers, or failures to transfer information, responsibility, and accountability, can have severe consequences for hospitalized patients. Clinical handovers are practiced every day, in many ways, in all institutional health care settings. Objective This study aimed to design an evidence-based, nursing handover standard for inpatients for use at shift changes or internal transfers between hospital wards. Methods We carried out a modified, multiround, web-based, Delphi data collection survey of an anonymized panel sample of 264 nurse experts working at a multisite public hospital in Switzerland. Each survey round was built on responses from the previous one. The surveys ended with a focus group discussion consisting of a randomly selected panel of participants to explain why items for the evidence-based clinical nursing handover standard were selected or not selected. Items had to achieve a consensus of ≥70% for selection and inclusion. Results The study presents the items selected by consensus for an evidence-based nursing handover standard for inpatients for use at shift changes or internal transfers. It also presents the reasons why survey items were or were not included. Conclusions This modified Delphi survey method enabled us to develop a consensus- and evidence-based nursing handover standard now being trialed at shift changes and the internal transfers of inpatients at our multisite public hospital in Switzerland.

scholarly journals An Evidence-Based, Nursing Handover Standard for a Multisite Public Hospital in Switzerland: Web-Based, Modified Delphi Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Tacchini-Jacquier ◽  
Hélène Hertzog ◽  
Kilian Ambord ◽  
Peter Urben ◽  
Pierre Turini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Public Hospital ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Evidence Based Nursing

BACKGROUND Ineffective communication procedures create openings for errors when health care professionals fail to transfer complete, consistent information. Deficient or absent clinical handovers, or failures to transfer information, responsibility, and accountability, can have severe consequences for hospitalized patients. Clinical handovers are practiced every day, in many ways, in all institutional health care settings. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to design an evidence-based, nursing handover standard for inpatients for use at shift changes or internal transfers between hospital wards. METHODS We carried out a modified, multiround, web-based, Delphi data collection survey of an anonymized panel sample of 264 nurse experts working at a multisite public hospital in Switzerland. Each survey round was built on responses from the previous one. The surveys ended with a focus group discussion consisting of a randomly selected panel of participants to explain why items for the evidence-based clinical nursing handover standard were selected or not selected. Items had to achieve a consensus of ≥70% for selection and inclusion. RESULTS The study presents the items selected by consensus for an evidence-based nursing handover standard for inpatients for use at shift changes or internal transfers. It also presents the reasons why survey items were or were not included. CONCLUSIONS This modified Delphi survey method enabled us to develop a consensus- and evidence-based nursing handover standard now being trialed at shift changes and the internal transfers of inpatients at our multisite public hospital in Switzerland.

scholarly journals Tools to Assess the Trustworthiness of Evidence-Based Point-of-Care Information for Health Care Professionals: Systematic Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerlinde Lenaerts ◽  
Geertruida E Bekkering ◽  
Martine Goossens ◽  
Leen De Coninck ◽  
Nicolas Delvaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Website Design ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Care Information ◽  
Website Interactivity

BACKGROUND User-friendly information at the point of care should be well structured, rapidly accessible, and comprehensive. Also, this information should be trustworthy, as it will be used by health care practitioners to practice evidence-based medicine. Therefore, a standard, validated tool to evaluate the trustworthiness of such point-of-care information resources is needed. OBJECTIVE This systematic review sought to search for tools to assess the trustworthiness of point-of-care resources and to describe and analyze the content of these tools. METHODS A systematic search was performed on three sources: (1) we searched online for initiatives that worked off of the trustworthiness of medical information; (2) we searched Medline (PubMed) until June 2019 for relevant literature; and (3) we scanned reference lists and lists of citing papers via Web of Science for each retrieved paper. We included all studies, reports, websites, or methodologies that reported on tools that assessed the trustworthiness of medical information for professionals. From the selected studies, we extracted information on the general characteristics of the tools. As no standard, risk-of-bias assessment instruments are available for these types of studies, we described how each tool was developed, including any assessments on reliability and validity. We analyzed the criteria used in the different tools and divided them into five categories: (1) author-related information; (2) evidence-based methodology; (3) website quality; (4) website design and usability; and (5) website interactivity. The percentage of tools in compliance with these categories and the different criteria were calculated. RESULTS Included in this review was a total of 17 tools, all published between 1997 and 2018. The tools were developed for different purposes, from a general quality assessment of medical information to very detailed analyses, all specifically for point-of-care resources. However, the development process of the tools was poorly described. Overall, seven tools had a scoring system implemented, two were assessed for reliability only, and two other tools were assessed for both validity and reliability. The content analysis showed that all the tools assessed criteria related to an evidence-based methodology: 82% of the tools assessed author-related information, 71% assessed criteria related to website quality, 71% assessed criteria related to website design and usability, and 47% of the tools assessed criteria related to website interactivity. There was significant variability in criteria used, as some were very detailed while others were more broadly defined. CONCLUSIONS The 17 included tools encompass a variety of items important for the assessment of the trustworthiness of point-of-care information. Overall, two tools were assessed for both reliability and validity, but they lacked some essential criteria for the assessment of the trustworthiness of medical information for use at the point-of-care. Currently, a standard, validated tool does not exist. The results of this review may contribute to the development of such an instrument, which may enhance the quality of point-of-care information in the long term.

scholarly journals Tools to Assess the Trustworthiness of Evidence-Based Point-of-Care Information for Health Care Professionals: Systematic Review

10.2196/15415 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. e15415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerlinde Lenaerts ◽  
Geertruida E Bekkering ◽  
Martine Goossens ◽  
Leen De Coninck ◽  
Nicolas Delvaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Website Design ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Care Information ◽  
Website Interactivity

Background User-friendly information at the point of care should be well structured, rapidly accessible, and comprehensive. Also, this information should be trustworthy, as it will be used by health care practitioners to practice evidence-based medicine. Therefore, a standard, validated tool to evaluate the trustworthiness of such point-of-care information resources is needed. Objective This systematic review sought to search for tools to assess the trustworthiness of point-of-care resources and to describe and analyze the content of these tools. Methods A systematic search was performed on three sources: (1) we searched online for initiatives that worked off of the trustworthiness of medical information; (2) we searched Medline (PubMed) until June 2019 for relevant literature; and (3) we scanned reference lists and lists of citing papers via Web of Science for each retrieved paper. We included all studies, reports, websites, or methodologies that reported on tools that assessed the trustworthiness of medical information for professionals. From the selected studies, we extracted information on the general characteristics of the tools. As no standard, risk-of-bias assessment instruments are available for these types of studies, we described how each tool was developed, including any assessments on reliability and validity. We analyzed the criteria used in the different tools and divided them into five categories: (1) author-related information; (2) evidence-based methodology; (3) website quality; (4) website design and usability; and (5) website interactivity. The percentage of tools in compliance with these categories and the different criteria were calculated. Results Included in this review was a total of 17 tools, all published between 1997 and 2018. The tools were developed for different purposes, from a general quality assessment of medical information to very detailed analyses, all specifically for point-of-care resources. However, the development process of the tools was poorly described. Overall, seven tools had a scoring system implemented, two were assessed for reliability only, and two other tools were assessed for both validity and reliability. The content analysis showed that all the tools assessed criteria related to an evidence-based methodology: 82% of the tools assessed author-related information, 71% assessed criteria related to website quality, 71% assessed criteria related to website design and usability, and 47% of the tools assessed criteria related to website interactivity. There was significant variability in criteria used, as some were very detailed while others were more broadly defined. Conclusions The 17 included tools encompass a variety of items important for the assessment of the trustworthiness of point-of-care information. Overall, two tools were assessed for both reliability and validity, but they lacked some essential criteria for the assessment of the trustworthiness of medical information for use at the point-of-care. Currently, a standard, validated tool does not exist. The results of this review may contribute to the development of such an instrument, which may enhance the quality of point-of-care information in the long term. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42019122565; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=122565

The Preschool Stuttering Screen for Health Care Professionals

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-62
Author(s):  
Joseph Donaher ◽  
Christina Deery ◽  
Sarah Vogel
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Preschool Children ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Developmental Profile

Healthcare professionals require a thorough understanding of stuttering since they frequently play an important role in the identification and differential diagnosis of stuttering for preschool children. This paper introduces The Preschool Stuttering Screen for Healthcare Professionals (PSSHP) which highlights risk factors identified in the literature as being associated with persistent stuttering. By integrating the results of the checklist with a child’s developmental profile, healthcare professionals can make better-informed, evidence-based decisions for their patients.

scholarly journals Building capacity for implementation—the KT Challenge

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes T. Black ◽  
Marla Steinberg ◽  
Amanda E. Chisholm ◽  
Kristi Coldwell ◽  
Alison M. Hoens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Practice Change ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Improvement Programs ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The KT Challenge program supports health care professionals to effectively implement evidence-based practices. Unlike other knowledge translation (KT) programs, this program is grounded in capacity building, focuses on health care professionals (HCPs), and uses a multi-component intervention. This study presents the evaluation of the KT Challenge program to assess the impact on uptake, KT capacity, and practice change. Methods The evaluation used a mixed-methods retrospective pre-post design involving surveys and review of documents such as teams’ final reports. Online surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were deployed at four time points (after both workshops, 6 months into implementation, and at the end of the 2-year funded projects) to measure KT capacity (knowledge, skills, and confidence) and impact on practice change. Qualitative data was analyzed using a general inductive approach and quantitative data was analyzed using non-parametric statistics. Results Participants reported statistically significant increases in knowledge and confidence across both workshops, at the 6-month mark of their projects, and at the end of their projects. In addition, at the 6-month check-in, practitioners reported statistically significant improvements in their ability to implement practice changes. In the first cohort of the program, of the teams who were able to complete their projects, half were able to show demonstrable practice changes. Conclusions The KT Challenge was successful in improving the capacity of HCPs to implement evidence-based practice changes and has begun to show demonstrable improvements in a number of practice areas. The program is relevant to a variety of HCPs working in diverse practice settings and is relatively inexpensive to implement. Like all practice improvement programs in health care settings, a number of challenges emerged stemming from the high turnover of staff and the limited capacity of some practitioners to take on anything beyond direct patient care. Efforts to address these challenges have been added to subsequent cohorts of the program and ongoing evaluation will examine if they are successful. The KT Challenge program has continued to garner great interest among practitioners, even in the midst of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows promise for organizations looking for better ways to mobilize knowledge to improve patient care and empower staff. This study contributes to the implementation science literature by providing a description and evaluation of a new model for embedding KT practice skills in health care settings.

Quality Assessment of HTA reports: a Critical Appraisal Toolkit within an institutional HTA program

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Bossi ◽  
M Tringali ◽  
P Colombo ◽  
C Mazzali ◽  
G Puleo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Population Aging ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Lombardy Region ◽  
Double Blinded ◽  
Sustainable Health ◽  
Local Healthcare

Abstract Issue With population aging, increased demand for healthcare and limited availability of economic and human resources, well-functioning and sustainable health systems have to rely on rigorous and evidence-based assessments of complex technologies' clinical effectiveness and safety. The Lombardy Region in Northern Italy has a well-established HTA program that offers technical support to its hospitals' network to produce and to review Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports. Description of the Problem To better coordinate the HTA network and to reduce self-referencing of University and Community hospitals, Lombardy Region carried out an intense field training and distance learning from year 2017, with a project aimed at involving health care professionals in an accurate evaluation of technologies in 18 HTA reports. The regional HTA Supporting Centre developed a Toolkit for the critical appraisal of reports and supporting literature to improve the quality of hospital-based reports. Results In compliance with the regional Law DGR XI/1046 17.12.2018 and the framework proposed, during year 2019 hospitals used the Toolkit to help writing complete and good quality HTA reports on 37 different technologies. With a Public Health resident internship, the Toolkit was revised, extended and then used in 2020 by the hospital's HTA network during the double blinded peer review, mandated by the regional Law DGR XI/2672 16.12.2019, of the year 2019 HTA reports. Detailed results will be presented at the conference. Lessons We observed an increase in number of HTA reports from 2018 to 2019, a greater language's and format's homogeneity and an improvement in the quality of some reports, which will be submitted to the Regional HTA Committee for appraisal and reimbursement. Key messages The development and use of a Critical Appraisal Toolkit in an Regional HTA program can help hospitals write complete and good quality HTA reports. A centrally supported quality improvement of distributed assessment activities in a network of hospitals can enhance the production of HTA reports, relevant to the needs of a local healthcare system.

scholarly journals Nurses and Pharmaceutical Care: Interprofessional, Evidence-Based Working to Improve Patient Care and Outcomes

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5973
Author(s):  
Tinne Dilles ◽  
Jana Heczkova ◽  
Styliani Tziaferi ◽  
Ann Karin Helgesen ◽  
Vigdis Abrahamsen Grøndahl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Pharmaceutical Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
Improve Patient Care ◽  
Modern Medicine ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Research Education

Pharmaceutical care necessitates significant efforts from patients, informal caregivers, the interprofessional team of health care professionals and health care system administrators. Collaboration, mutual respect and agreement amongst all stakeholders regarding responsibilities throughout the complex process of pharmaceutical care is needed before patients can take full advantage of modern medicine. Based on the literature and policy documents, in this position paper, we reflect on opportunities for integrated evidence-based pharmaceutical care to improve care quality and patient outcomes from a nursing perspective. Despite the consensus that interprofessional collaboration is essential, in clinical practice, research, education and policy-making challenges are often not addressed interprofessionally. This paper concludes with specific advises to move towards the implementation of more interprofessional, evidence-based pharmaceutical care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document