Post-trauma: Is evidence based practice a fantasy?

Trauma, bereavement, and loss are universal human experiences. Much has been written about the process that the bereaved go through following the loss of a loved one. Recent events such as 9/11, earthquakes in Turkey, genocides in Rwanda, community conflict in Northern Ireland, and the Asian Tsunami Disaster have drawn unprecedented public attention to the subject of traumatic bereavement. Increasingly, it is recognised that while most people are able to cope with loss generally by eventually restructuring their lives, those bereaved in traumatic circumstance often find it extremely difficult. As a consequence, a plethora of interventions have emerged, however, to-date, little is know about their actual effectiveness in helping the bereaved. With the emphasis of health and welfare professions on evidencebased practice (EBP) greater than ever and a raising awareness of accountability as key element of ethical practice, the call for EBP in traumatic bereavement is compelling. Using examples from work carried out in Northern Ireland, we look at the backdrop of the issues involved, describe some of the most commonly used therapeutic interventions, and explore the possibility of evidence-based practice.

Hidden Gems: systematically searching electronic databases for research publications for social work and social care.

Context: Electronic bibliographic databases are a key source for professional publications about social work and community care more generally. This article describes and evaluates a method of identifying relevant articles as part of a systematic review of research evidence. Decision making about institutional and home care services for older people is used as an example. Method: Four databases (Social Science Citation Index, Medline, CINAHL, and Caredata) that abstract publications relevant to health and social services were searched systematically to identify relevant research studies. The items retrieved were appraised independently using a standard form developed for the purpose. The searches were compared in terms of sensitivity, precision, overlap between databases, and inter-rater reliability. Results: The search retrieved 525 articles, of which 276 were relevant. The four databases retrieved 55%, 41%, 19%, and 1% of the relevant articles respectively, achieving these sensitivities with precision levels of 54%, 48%, 84% and 94%. The databases retrieved 116, 73, 24 and 15 unique relevant articles respectively, showing the need to use a range of databases. Discussion: A general approach to creating a search to retrieve relevant research has been developed. The development of an international, indexed database dedicated to literature relevant to social services is a priority to enable progress in evidence-based policy and practice in social work. Editors and researchers should consider using structured abstracts in order to improve the retrieval and dissemination of research.

The postmodernist war on evidence-based practice

In this paper, we examine the war of words between those who contend that health care practice, including nursing, should primarily be informed by research (the evidence-based practice movement), and those who argue that there should be no restrictions on the sources of knowledge used by practitioners (the postmodernists). We review the postmodernist interventions of Dave Holmes and his colleagues, observing that the postmodernist style to which they adhere, which includes the use of continental philosophy, metaphors, and acerbic delivery, tends to obscure their substantive arguments. The heated nature of some responses to them has tended to have the same effect. However, the substantive arguments are important. Five main postmodernist charges are identified and discussed. The first argument, that the notion of ‘best evidence’ implies a hierarchical and exclusivist approach to knowledge, is persuasive. However, the contention that this hierarchy is maintained by the combined pressures of capitalism and vested interests within academia and the health services, is less well founded. Nevertheless, postmodernist contentions that the hierarchy embraced by the evidence-based practice movement damages health care because it excludes other forms of evidence that are needed to understand the complexity of care, it marginalizes important aspects of clinical knowledge, and it fails to take account of individuals or their experience, are all seen to be of some merit. However, we do not share the postmodernist conclusion that this adds up to a fascist order. Instead, we characterize evidence-based practice as a necessary but not sufficient component of health care knowledge.