Bridging the divide: a survey of nurses' opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization in the practice setting

Background. Many researchers have explored the barriers to research uptake in order to overcome them and identify strategies to facilitate research utilization. However, the research–practice gap remains a persistent issue for the nursing profession.

Aims and objectives. The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of perceived influences on nurses' utilization of research, and explore what differences or commonalities exist between the findings of this research and those of studies that have been conducted in various countries during the past 10 years.

Design. Nurses were surveyed to elicit their opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization. The instrument comprised a 29-item validated questionnaire, titled Barriers to Research Utilisation Scale (BARRIERS Scale), an eight-item scale of facilitators, provision for respondents to record additional barriers and/or facilitators and a series of demographic questions.

Method. The questionnaire was administered in 2001 to all nurses (n = 761) working at a major teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. A 45% response rate was achieved.

Results. Greatest barriers to research utilization reported included time constraints, lack of awareness of available research literature, insufficient authority to change practice, inadequate skills in critical appraisal and lack of support for implementation of research findings. Greatest facilitators to research utilization reported included availability of more time to review and implement research findings, availability of more relevant research and colleague support.

Conclusion. One of the most striking features of the findings of the present study is that perceptions of Australian nurses are remarkably consistent with reported perceptions of nurses in the US, UK and Northern Ireland during the past decade.

Relevance to clinical practice. If the use of research evidence in practice results in better outcomes for our patients, this behoves us, as a profession, to address issues surrounding support for implementation of research findings, authority to change practice, time constraints and ability to critically appraise research with conviction and a sense of urgency.

The relationship between characteristics of context and research utilization in a pediatric setting

Background
Research utilization investigators have called for more focused examination of the influence of context on research utilization behaviors. Yet, up until recently, lack of instrumentation to identify and quantify aspects of organizational context that are integral to research use has significantly hampered these efforts. The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was developed to assess the relationships between organizational factors and research utilization by a variety of healthcare professional groups. The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a pilot study using the ACT to elicit pediatric and neonatal healthcare professionals' perceptions of the organizational context in which they work and their use of research to inform practice. Specifically, we report on the relationship between dimensions of context, founded on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework, and self-reported research use behavior.

Methods
A cross-sectional survey approach was employed using a version of the ACT, modified specifically for pediatric settings. The survey was administered to nurses working in three pediatric units in Alberta, Canada. Scores for three dimensions of context (culture, leadership and evaluation) were used to categorize respondent data into one of four context groups (high, moderately high, moderately low and low). We then examined the relationships between nurses` self-reported research use and their perceived context.

Results
A 69% response rate was achieved. Statistically significant differences in nurses' perceptions of culture, leadership and evaluation, and self-reported conceptual research use were found across the three units. Differences in instrumental research use across the three groups of nurses by unit were not significant. Higher self-reported instrumental and conceptual research use by all nurses in the sample was associated with more positive perceptions of their context.

Conclusions
Overall, the results of this study lend support to the view that more positive contexts are associated with higher reports of research use in practice. These findings have implications for organizational endeavors to promote evidence-informed practice and maximize the quality of care. Importantly, these findings can be used to guide the development of interventions to target modifiable characteristics of organizational context that are influential in shaping research use behavior.

Beyond the BARRIERS scale : commonly reported barriers to research use

The evidence-based practice movement has highlighted the importance of translating research evidence into practice. However, the gap between research and practice points to the existence of significant barriers to research use. To identify the most commonly cited barriers to the use of research in practice, the findings arising from studies that used the Barriers to Research Utilization Scale are examined. Based on these findings, the authors discuss and make recommendations to assist nurse administrators in overcoming universally reported barriers to research use.

To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review

Background : In the past forty years, many gains have been made in our understanding of the concept of research utilization. While numerous studies exist on professional nurses' use of research in practice, no attempt has been made to systematically evaluate and synthesize this body of literature with respect to the extent to which nurses use research in their clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and analyze the available evidence related to the extent to which nurses use research findings in practice.

Methods : This study was a systematic review of published and grey literature. The search strategy included 13 online bibliographic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, HAPI, Web of Science, SCOPUS, OCLC Papers First, OCLC WorldCat, ABI Inform, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts. The inclusion criteria consisted of primary research reports that assess professional nurses' use of research in practice, written in the English or Scandinavian languages. Extent of research use was determined by assigning research use scores reported in each article to one of four quartiles: low, moderate-low, moderate-high, or high.

Results : Following removal of duplicate citations, a total of 12,418 titles were identified through database searches, of which 133 articles were retrieved. Of the articles retrieved, 55 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The 55 final reports included cross-sectional/survey (n = 51) and quasi-experimental (n = 4) designs. A sensitivity analysis, comparing findings from all reports with those rated moderate (moderate-weak and moderate-strong) and strong quality, did not show significant differences. In a majority of the articles identified (n = 38, 69%), nurses reported moderate-high research use.

Conclusions : According to this review, nurses' reported use of research is moderate-high and has remained relatively consistent over time until the early 2000's. This finding, however, may paint an overly optimistic picture of the extent to which nurses use research in their practice given the methodological problems inherent in the majority of studies. There is a clear need for the development of standard measures of research use and robust well-designed studies examining nurses' use of research and its impact on patient outcomes. The relatively unchanged self-reports of moderate-high research use by nurses is troubling given that over 40 years have elapsed since the first studies in this review were conducted and the increasing emphasis in the past 15 years on evidence-based practice. More troubling is the absence of studies in which attempts are made to assess the effects of varying levels of research use on patient outcomes.

Utilization of a population health survey in policy and practice: a case study

Background
There is growing interest by funding bodies and researchers in assessing the impact of research on real world policy and practice. Population health monitoring surveys provide an important source of data on the prevalence and patterns of health problems, but few empirical studies have explored if and how such data is used to influence policy or practice decisions. Here we provide a case study analysis of how the findings from an Australian population monitoring survey series of children’s weight and weight-related behaviors (Schools Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey (SPANS)) have been used, and the key facilitators and barriers to their utilization.

Methods
Data collection included semi-structured interviews with the chief investigators (n = 3) and end-users (n = 9) of SPANS data to explore if, how and under what circumstances the survey findings had been used, bibliometric analysis and verification using documentary evidence. Data analysis involved thematic coding of interview data and triangulation with other data sources to produce case summaries of policy and practice impacts for each of the three survey years (1997, 2004, 2010). Case summaries were then reviewed and discussed by the authors to distil key themes on if, how and why the SPANS findings had been used to guide policy and practice.

Results
We found that the survey findings were used for agenda setting (raising awareness of issues), identifying areas and target groups for interventions, informing new policies, and supporting and justifying existing policies and programs across a range of sectors. Reported factors influencing use of the findings were: i) the perceived credibility of survey findings; ii) dissemination strategies used; and, iii) a range of contextual factors.

Conclusions
Using a novel approach, our case study provides important new insights into how and under what circumstances population health monitoring data can be used to influence real world policy and practice. The findings highlight the importance of population monitoring programs being conducted by independent credible agencies, researchers engaging end-users from the inception of survey programs and utilizing existing policy networks and structures, and using a range of strategies to disseminate the findings that go beyond traditional peer review publications.

Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective

The dominant literature on research synthesis methods has positivist and neo-positivist origins. In recent years, the landscape of research synthesis methods has changed rapidly to become inclusive. This article highlights methodologically inclusive advancements in research synthesis methods. Attention is drawn to insights from interpretive, critical, and participatory traditions for enhancing trustworthiness, utility, and/or emancipatory potential for research syntheses. Also noted is a paucity of the literature that builds connections between methodologically diverse segments of the literature on research synthesis methods. Salient features of a methodologically inclusive research synthesis (MIRS) framework are described. The MIRS framework has been conceptualized by distilling and synthesizing ideas, theories, and strategies from the extensive literatures on research synthesis methods and primary research methods. Rather than prescribe how a research synthesis should be conducted or evaluated, this article attempts to open spaces, raise questions, explore possibilities, and contest taken-for-granted practices.

Assessment of variation in the alberta context tool : the contribution of unit level contextual factors and practice specialty in Canadian pediatric acute care settings

Background: There are few validated measures of organizational context and none that we located are parsimonious and address modifiable characteristics of context. The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was developed to meet this need. The instrument assesses 8 dimensions of context, which comprise 10 concepts. The purpose of this paper is to report evidence to further the validity argument for ACT. The specific objectives of this paper are to: (1) examine the extent to which the 10 ACT concepts discriminate between patient care units and (2) identify variables that significantly contribute to between-unit variation for each of the 10 concepts.

Methods: 859 professional nurses (844 valid responses) working in medical, surgical and critical care units of 8 Canadian pediatric hospitals completed the ACT. A random intercept, fixed effects hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) strategy was used to quantify and explain variance in the 10 ACT concepts to establish the ACT’s ability to discriminate between units. We ran 40 models (a series of 4 models for each of the 10 concepts) in which we systematically assessed the unique contribution (i.e., error variance reduction) of different variables to between-unit variation. First, we constructed a null model in which we quantified the variance overall, in each of the concepts. Then we controlled for the contribution of individual level variables (Model 1). In Model 2, we assessed the contribution of practice specialty (medical, surgical, critical care) to variation since it was central to construction of the sampling frame for the study. Finally, we assessed the contribution of additional unit level variables (Model 3).

Results: The null model (unadjusted baseline HLM model) established that there was significant variation between units in each of the 10 ACT concepts (i.e., discrimination between units). When we controlled for individual characteristics, significant variation in the 10 concepts remained. Assessment of the contribution of specialty to between-unit variation enabled us to explain more variance (1.19% to 16.73%) in 6 of the 10 ACT concepts. Finally, when we assessed the unique contribution of the unit level variables available to us, we were able to explain additional variance (15.91% to 73.25%) in 7 of the 10 ACT concepts.

Conclusion: The findings reported here represent the third published argument for validity of the ACT and adds to the evidence supporting its use to discriminate patient care units by all 10 contextual factors. We found evidence of relationships between a variety of individual and unit-level variables that explained much of this between-unit variation for each of the 10 ACT concepts. Future research will include examination of the relationships between the ACT’s contextual factors and research utilization by nurses and ultimately the relationships between context, research utilization, and outcomes for patients.

Reliability and validity of the Alberta context tool (ACT) with professional nurses: Findings from a multi-study analysis

Although organizational context is central to evidence-based practice, underdeveloped measurement hindersitsassessment. The Alberta Context Tool, comprised of 59 items that tap10 modifiable contextual concepts, was developed to address this gap. The purpose of this study to examine the reliability and validity of scores obtained when the Alberta Context Tool is completed by professional nurses across different healthcare settings. Five separate studies (N = 2361 nurses across different care settings) comprised the study sample. Reliability and validity were assessed. Cronbach's alpha exceeded 0.70 for9/10 Alberta Context Tool concepts. Item-total correlations exceeded acceptable standards for 56/59items. Confirmatory Factor Analysescoordinated acceptably with the Alberta Context Tool's proposed latent structure. The mean values for each Alberta Context Tool concept increased from low to high levels of research utilization(as hypothesized) further supporting its validity. This study provides robust evidence forreliability and validity of scores obtained with the Alberta Context Tool when administered to professional nurses.

Knowledge transfer and utilization: implications for home healthcare pain management

Implementation of research evidence into clinical practice is a complex and dynamic process that has become the subject of investigation in the field of "translation science" or "knowledge utilization." Research shows how individuals, units, and organizations all influence the rate and extent of adoption of research evidence. Environmental factors also play an important role in this process. This article summarizes key lessons from translation science and examines the implications for the organization and delivery of home healthcare. The implementation of pain management guidelines is used as an example.

Mixed methods and its application in prehospital research: a systematic review

The utilization of mixed methods in prehospital research is relatively new. Its use may enhance research findings, but it is not without its challenges. This study used online databases to systemically search for literature relating to the application of mixed methods in prehospital research, in order to understand the place of mixed methods research in the prehospital setting. The prehospital field appears to be embracing mixed methods as an approach to research due to its ability to address health care questions in complex, diverse environments. However, supplemental literature in this area is limited, with mixed methods expertise being found in other health science areas. Researchers should endeavor to continue to contribute to this area through high-quality, rigorous mixed methods studies.

The Integrating Theory, Evidence and Action (ITEA) method: a procedure for helping practitioners translate theory and research into action

Introduction: The aim of this article is to describe and explain a new method for integrating theory and evidence that enables practitioners to translate evidence into action applied in their practice. Method: A new multiple methods procedure called the Integrating Theory, Evidence and Action method is described. It is a mixed method that progresses through seven distinct steps: clinical question, framework, identification, deconstruction, analysis, reconstruction, and transfer/utilization. An example of using this method to review evidence around occupational therapy with people recovering from alcohol misuse and/or abuse is provided. Findings: This method highlights the importance of theory, tests the empirical strength of theories, includes diverse forms of evidence, and encourages the integration of knowledge within clinical practice. Conclusion: The Integrating Theory, Evidence and Action method is accessible and useful to practitioners and will support their efforts to make their practice evidence based. Current methods of evidence-based practice focus mostly on research evidence (particularly quantitative evidence); however, research is only one of the ways of knowing that practitioners draw upon to guide their practice. This method enables occupational therapists to integrate theory, evidence, and practice in a coherent and translatable way.

Population prevalence of personality disorder and associations with physical health comorbidities and health care service utilization: a review

Personality disorder (PD), outcomes of diverse comorbid physical health conditions, and the associated burden on health service resources have seldom been studied at a population level. Consequently, there is limited evidence that might inform a public health approach to managing PD and associated mental and physical disability. A review was conducted of population-based studies examining the prevalence of PD and associations between physical comorbidities and service utilization. The prevalence of any PDs were common (4.4% -21.5%) among populations spanning England, Wales, Scotland, Western Europe, Norway, Australia, and the United States. Preliminary evidence supports associations between PDs from Clusters A and B and physical comorbidities, namely cardiovascular diseases and arthritis. PD appears to increase health care utilization, particularly in primary care. In order to facilitate rational population health planning, further population studies are required.

Utilization and efficacy of internet-based eHealth technology in gastroenterology: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: While there have been several reviews exploring the outcomes of various eHealth studies, none have been gastroenterology-specific. This paper aims to evaluate the research conducted within gastroenterology which utilizes internet-based eHealth technology to promote physical and psychological well-being. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature review of internet-based eHealth interventions involving gastroenterological cohorts was conducted. Searched databases included: EbSCOhost Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting on eHealth interventions (both to manage mental health problems and somatic symptoms) in gastroenterology, with no time restrictions. Exclusion criteria were non-experimental studies, or studies using only email as primary eHealth method, and studies in language other than English. RESULTS: A total of 17 papers were identified; seven studies evaluated the efficacy of a psychologically oriented intervention (additional two provided follow-up analyses exploring the original published data) and eight studies evaluated disease management programs for patients with either irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or celiac disease. Overall, psychological eHealth interventions were associated with significant reductions in bowel symptoms and improvement in quality of life (QoL) that tended to continue up to 12 months follow up. The eHealth disease management was shown to generally improve QoL, adherence, knowledge about the disease, and reduce healthcare costs in IBD, although the studies were associated with various methodological problems, and thus, this observation should be confirmed in well-designed interventional studies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence to date, eHealth internet-based technology is a promising tool that can be utilized to both promote and enhance gastrointestinal disease management and mental health.