scholarly journals Evaluation of Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in the  Health Services: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 1645
Author(s):  
Ali Ayoubian ◽  
Amir Ashkan Nasiripour ◽  
Seyed Jamaledin Tabibi ◽  
Mohammadkarim Bahadori
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Healthcare Management ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Health ◽  
Evidence Based Healthcare

Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an ambition for health service administrators. We aimed to systematically review the major relevant articles in case of barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based practice in health services. Methods and Materials: The type of study was a systematic review. We searched the libraries and online sources such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Wiley, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, and Google scholar. We used keywords included “Evidence-Based Practice”, “Evidence-Based Management”, “Healthcare”, “Care Management, Evidence-Based Healthcare Management”, “Health Care”, Health”, “Barrier”, “Facilitator”, policy and “Evidence-Based Healthcare”. Results: In total, 12 studies were included. Several barriers and facilitators were recognized through the included papers, the factors such as organization support and a helpful education system improved skills, knowledge, and confidence to EBP. The outcomes of studies were identified as the employ of the internet as a highest-rated skill for increasing EBP quality. Conclusion: Generally, the results showed health service administrators should first identify barriers of EBP then transferred them to facilitators to the implementation of proper and efficient EBP. [GMJ.2020;9:e1645]

scholarly journals Health service use among adults with cerebral palsy: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e035892
Author(s):  
Manjula Manikandan ◽  
Aisling Walsh ◽  
Claire Kerr ◽  
Michael Walsh ◽  
Jennifer M Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cerebral Palsy ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Mixed Method ◽  
Service Use ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Health Service Use ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Increased Risk

IntroductionCerebral palsy (CP) is a neurodisability that primarily results in motor impairments and activity limitations, but is often associated with epilepsy and disturbances of sensation, perception, cognition, behaviour and speech. Most children with CP survive well into adulthood. Adults with CP experience increased risk of age-related chronic conditions such as arthritis, stroke, cardiorespiratory and mental health conditions in addition to the ongoing disabilities experienced from childhood. Therefore, adults with CP often require extensive health services. However, health service use among adults with CP has not been well documented. This mixed method review aims to identify, appraise and synthesise quantitative and qualitative literature examining health service use among adults with CP.Methods and analysisThe mixed method systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library from inception to March 2020 will be conducted. Quantitative observational studies, qualitative studies and mixed method studies examining health service use among adults with CP (≥18 years) will be included. Outcomes of interest are the proportion of adults using health services frequency of use and experiences of health services from the perspectives of adults with CP, caregivers and health service providers. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full-texts, extract data and assess the quality of included studies using JBI instruments. Where possible a pooled analysis and aggregation of findings will be performed for quantitative and qualitative data, respectively, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)/GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) employed. Quantitative and qualitative findings will be integrated using a triangulation approach at the synthesis stage. A narrative synthesis will be carried out where this is not possible.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this review. The findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020155 380.

scholarly journals Evaluating health service outcomes of public involvement in health service design in high-income countries: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Lloyd ◽  
Amanda Kenny ◽  
Nerida Hyett
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Service Design ◽  
High Income ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Service Outcomes

Abstract Background Internationally, it is expected that health services will involve the public in health service design. Evaluation of public involvement has typically focused on the process and experiences for participants. Less is known about outcomes for health services. The aim of this systematic review was to a) identify and synthesise what is known about health service outcomes of public involvement and b) document how outcomes were evaluated. Methods Searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL for studies that reported health service outcomes from public involvement in health service design. The review was limited to high-income countries and studies in English. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in health research. Content analysis was used to determine the outcomes of public involvement in health service design and how outcomes were evaluated. Results A total of 93 articles were included. The majority were published in the last 5 years, were qualitative, and were located in the United Kingdom. A range of health service outcomes (discrete products, improvements to health services and system/policy level changes) were reported at various levels (service level, across services, and across organisations). However, evaluations of outcomes were reported in less than half of studies. In studies where outcomes were evaluated, a range of methods were used; most frequent were mixed methods. The quality of study design and reporting was inconsistent. Conclusion When reporting public involvement in health service design authors outline a range of outcomes for health services, but it is challenging to determine the extent of outcomes due to inadequate descriptions of study design and poor reporting. There is an urgent need for evaluations, including longitudinal study designs and cost-benefit analyses, to fully understand outcomes from public involvement in health service design.

scholarly journals Interventions for Maximizing Quality Communication in Cancer Care: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽  
pp. 99s-99s ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Licqurish ◽  
L. Pattuwage ◽  
S. Chima ◽  
A. Qama ◽  
J. Emery
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cancer Information ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Communication Interventions

Background: Clinician communication has shown to influence cancer patients' perception of care and satisfaction. Effective communication is therefore a critical aspect of patient-centered care. Health services should be implementing evidence-based communication interventions to improve the provision of cancer care to patients. Aim: We conducted a systematic review of the literature with the aim to identify effective communication strategies and/or interventions to improve clinician-patient communication. Methods: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL Plus) were searched for relevant citations from 2005 until October 2015 using search terms related to “cancer”, “information” and “communication”. Titles and abstracts were evaluated by two independent reviewers. Selected full text publications were assessed against the eligibility criteria. Quality was assessed using the AMSTAR guidelines and GRADE. Due to the enormity of the literature, only systematic reviews were included. Results: The database search yielded 2934 unique citations, of which 198 full texts were retrieved. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 41 systematic reviews were included. The included studies were broadly categorized under six major themes: e-health, technological and telephone-based interventions (n=9); patient education and tools (n=5); communication training (n=9); education interventions to improve cancer pain (n=6); tools to facilitate patients' participation in care/decision making (n=8); nurse delivered interventions (n=6). Conclusion: There are an enormous number of studies of communication interventions for cancer patients. The quality of the evidence to support some of these interventions is low; whereas other interventions have stronger evidence of effectiveness. Therefore, health services and clinicians should carefully consider which interventions they choose to implement. The recommendations from this review will assist clinicians and health services to choose evidence-based interventions which can improve care provision and/or patient outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document