Bringing values back into evidence-based nursing: the role of patients in resisting empiricism

We examine problems resulting from the narrow empirical focus associated with evidence-based nursing, including the deleterious influence of vested interests, disattention to patients’ experiences, underestimation of the importance of social processes, lack of an individualized research perspective, marginalization of other forms of knowledge, and the undermining of patients’ autonomy. Addressing each problem in turn, we argue that inclusion of patients at all stages of evidence-based practice can counter or ameliorate these problems. While we concede that patient involvement is not a complete solution to the problem of empiricism, it is the most effective means available to defend nursing values.

Evidence-based Practice in Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy

book review

Cancer Cachexia Care: The Contribution of Qualitative Research to Evidence-Based Practice

Background: Despite its prevalence and prognostic impact, primary cachexia is not well understood. Its potential to cause considerable psychological stress indicates the need for qualitative research to help understand the perspectives of those affected.

Objective: The aims of this study were to describe the perspectives of patients with primary cachexia, of their relatives, and of the healthcare professionals involved in their care and to demonstrate how this evidence can be applied in practice at 4 different levels of application ranging from empathy to coaching.

Methods: A review of the qualitative literature and empirical qualitative investigation was used to understand the experiences of patients and relatives and the perspectives of professionals.

Results: The main worries expressed by patients and relatives concerned appetite loss, changing appearance, prognosis, and social interaction. We also describe their coping responses and their views of professionals’ responses. The main concerns of professionals related to poor communication, lack of clinical guidance, and lack of professional education.

Conclusions: Understanding patients’, families’, and professionals’ perspectives, and mapping that understanding onto what we know about the trajectory and prognosis of the condition, provides the evidence base for good practice. Qualitative research has a central role to play in providing the knowledge base for the nursing care of patients with cachexia.

Implications for Practice: The evidence provided can improve nurses’ insight and assist them in assessment of status, the provision of guidance, and coaching. There is a need for the development of a holistic, information-based integrated care pathway for those with cancer cachexia and their families.

Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence-based interventions

Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) are pervasive developmental disorders that are diagnosed along a continuum of behavioural variants in social interaction, communication, and imagination. Some individuals on the spectrum are ‘high-functioning’ and able to cope in every day environments, while others are severely affected, non-verbal, and may have comorbid diagnoses, such as intellectual disability, epilepsy, and/or obsessional, conduct, or mental health disorders. ASD diagnosis can be formulated from as early as 6-months to one year of age, although it is more common that children are aged 2-3 years before diagnosis is affirmed. Frequently, higher functioning individuals are not diagnosed until adolescence or even adulthood.

Developing Evidence-Based Practice in Child Protection

This article argues for the adoption of an evidence-based approach to decision-making in child protection. Such a change hinges upon the availability of good quality, up-to-date evidence that is readily accessible to practitioners and policy-makers. Following a resume' of the arguments for recognizing controlled trials as methodologically superior to other forms of methodology in evaluating professional interventions, the article presents the case for adopting a similarly rigorous approach to synthesizing research findings. It then identifies a range of obstacles to promoting evidence-based practice and makes recommendations for changes in training, research, and practice which might facilitate improvement in both primary research and in reviews of the literature.

The use and limitation of realistic evaluation as a tool for evidence-based practice: a critical realist perspective

In this paper, we assess realistic evaluation’s articulation with evidence-based practice (EBP) from the perspective of critical realism. We argue that the adoption by realistic evaluation of a realist causal ontology means that it is better placed to explain complex healthcare interventions than the traditional method used by EBP, the randomized controlled trial (RCT). However, we do not conclude from this that the use of RCTs is without merit, arguing that it is possible to use both methods in combination under the rubric of realist theory. More negatively, we contend that the rejection of critical theory and utopianism by realistic evaluation in favour of the pragmatism of piecemeal social engineering means that it is vulnerable to accusations that it promotes technocratic interpretations of human problems. We conclude that, insofar as realistic evaluation adheres to the ontology of critical realism, it provides a sound contribution to EBP, but insofar as it rejects the critical turn of Bhaskar’s realism, it replicates the technocratic tendencies inherent in EBP.