Factors influencing the use of evidence based practice among physiotherapists and occupational therapists in their clinical work

Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a process through which research is applied in daily clinical practice. Occupational therapists (OTs) and physiotherapists (PTs) are expected to work in line with EBP in order to optimise health care resources. This expectation is too seldom fulfilled. Consequently, research findings may not be implemented in clinical practice in a timely manner, or at all. To remedy this situation, additional knowledge is needed regarding what factors influence the process of EBP among practitioners. The purpose of the present study was to identify factors that influence the use of EBP and the experienced effects of the use of EBP among PTs and OTs in their clinical work. Method: This was a qualitative interview study that consisted of six group interviews involving either OTs or PTs employed by the Jönköping County Council in the South of Sweden. Resulting data were analysed using content analysis. Results: The analysis resulted in the following categories: “definition of evidence and EBP”, “sources of evidence”, “barriers to acquiring evidence and to using evidence in clinical work”, “factors that facilitate the acquisition of evidence and the use of evidence in clinical work”, and “personal experiences of using EBP”. Basing clinical practice on scientific evidence evoked positive experiences, although an ambivalent view towards acting on clinical experience was evident. Participants reported that time for and increased knowledge about searching for, evaluating, and implementing EBP were needed. Conclusion: Because OTs are more oriented towards professional theories and models, and PTs are more focused on randomised controlled trials of interventions, different strategies appear to be needed to increase EBP in these two professions. Management support was considered vital to the implementation of EBP. However, the personal obligation to work in line with EBP must also be emphasised; the participants apparently underestimate its importance.

New graduate nurses' developmental trajectories for capability beliefs concerning core competencies for healthcare professionals : A national cohort study on patient-centered care, teamwork and evidence-based practice.

Background: This study aimed to describe the developmental trajectories of registered nurses' capability beliefs during their first 3 years of practice. The focus was on three core competencies for health professionals-patient-centered care, teamwork, and evidence-based practice. Methods: A national cohort of registered nurses (n = 1,205) was recruited during their nursing education and subsequently surveyed yearly during the first 3 years of working life. The survey included 16 items on capability beliefs divided into three subscales for the assessment of patient-centered care, teamwork, and evidence-based practice, and the data were analyzed with linear latent growth modeling. Results: The nurses' capability beliefs for patient-centered care increased over the three first years of working life, their capability beliefs for evidence-based practice were stable over the 3 years, and their capability beliefs for teamwork showed a downward trend. Linking evidence to action: Through collaboration between nursing education and clinical practice, the transition to work life could be supported and competence development in newly graduated nurses could be enhanced to help them master the core competencies. Future research should focus on determining which factors impact the development of capability beliefs in new nurses and how these factors can be developed by testing interventions.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: development of evidence-based guidelines in an acute care hospital

Background: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians, and health services researchers. Methods: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was performed for the period between 1995 and 2008 based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. Publications were assessed according to the Oxford classification of quality of evidence. A working group prepared proposals for recommendations which were then independently rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. All recommendations were then discussed in common and indications for procedures were rated confidentially a second time by the experts. Each indication for respiratory care was classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate, based on the panel median rating and the degree of intra-panel agreement. Results: Recommendations were formulated for the following procedures: non-invasive ventilation, continuous positive airway pressure, intermittent positive pressure breathing, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, mechanical insufflation-exsufflation, incentive spirometry, positive expiratory pressure, nasotracheal suctioning, noninstrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition, and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of evidence from literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus of experts. Conclusion: Despite a marked heterogeneity of scientific evidence, the method used allowed us to develop commonly agreed local guidelines for respiratory care. In addition, this work fostered a closer relationship between physiotherapists and physicians in our institution.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: evidence-based guidelines.

PRINCIPLES: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve the appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians and health service researchers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was conducted based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. A working group prepared proposals for recommendations which were then independently rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. All recommendations were then discussed in common and indications for procedures were rated confidentially a second time by the experts. The recommendations were then formulated on the basis of the level of evidence in the literature and on the consensus among these experts. RESULTS: Recommendations were formulated for the following procedures: non-invasive ventilation, continuous positive airway pressure, intermittent positive pressure breathing, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, mechanical insufflation-exsufflation, incentive spirometry, positive expiratory pressure, nasotracheal suctioning and non-instrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of the evidence from the literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus among the experts. CONCLUSION: Despite a marked heterogeneity of scientific evidence, the method used allowed us to develop commonly agreed local guidelines for respiratory care. In addition, this work fostered a closer relationship between physiotherapists and physicians in our institution.

Whither our Art? Clinical Wisdom & Evidence-based Medicine

The relationship between evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical judgement is the subject of conceptual and practical dispute. For example, EBM and clinical guidelines are seen to increasingly dominate medical decision-making at the expense of other, human elements, and to threaten the art of medicine. Clinical wisdom always remains open to question. We want to know why particular beliefs are held, and the epistemological status of claims based in wisdom or experience. The paper critically appraises a number of claims and distinctions, and attempts to clarify the connections between EBM, clinical experience and judgement, and the objective and evaluative categories of medicine. I conclude that to demystify clinical wisdom is not to devalue it. EBM ought not be conceived as needing to be limited or balanced by clinical wisdom, since if its language is translatable into terms comprehensible and applicable to individuals, it helps constitute clinical wisdom. Failure to appreciate this constitutive relation will help perpetuate medical paternalism and delay the adoption of properly evidence-based practice, which would be both unethical and unwise.

A project to improve the information seeking skills and increase the use of evidence-based research in public health practice

The ability of public health practitioners (PHPs) to work efficiently and effectively is negatively impacted by their lack of knowledge of the broad range of evidence-based practice information resources and tools that can be utilized to guide them in their development of health policies and programs. This project, a three-hour continuing education hands-on workshop with supporting resources, was designed to increase knowledge and skills of these resources. The workshop was presented as a pre-conference continuing education program for the Texas Public Health Association (TPHA) 2008 Annual Conference. Topics included: identification of evidence-based practice resources to aid in the development of policies and programs; identification of sources of publicly available data; utilization of data for community assessments; and accessing and searching the literature through a collection of databases available to all citizens of Texas. Supplemental resources included a blog that served as a gateway to the resources explored during the presentation, a community assessment workbook that incorporates both Healthy People 2010 objectives and links to reliable sources of data, and handouts providing additional instruction on the use of the resources covered during the workshop.^ Before- and after-workshop surveys based on Kirkpatrick's 4-level model of evaluation and the Theory of Planned Behavior were administered. Of the questions related to the trainer, the workshop, and the usefulness of the workshop, participants gave "Good" to "Excellent" responses to all one question. Confidence levels overall increased a statistically significant amount; measurements of attitude, social norms, and control showed no significant differences before and after the workshop. Lastly, participants indicated they were likely to use resources shown during the workshop within a one to three month time period on average. ^ The workshop and creation of supplemental resources served as a pilot for a funded project that will be continued with the development and delivery of four 4-week long webinar-based training sessions to be completed by December 2008. ^

Utilizing Evidence-Based Psychology Practice in the University of Denver's Professional Psychology Center: A Proposal

As acceptance of the Evidence-based Psychology Practice (EBPP) model continues to grow (Pagoto, Spring, Coups, Mulvaney, Coutu, & Ozakinci, 2007), it seems pertinent to explore how this model can be applied in different settings. This topic is timely as practitioners in the field are being held ever more accountable for the efficacy of the treatments they employ (Pagoto et al., 2007). Increased scrutiny has resulted in a need to integrate research into practice in order to ensure continued relevance in the ever-changing realm of American health care (Luebbe, Radcliffe, Callands, Green & Thorn, 2007; Collins, Leffingwell & Belar, 2007; Chwalisz, 2003). This paper explores how the requirements set forth by the American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice (2006) can be implemented at the University of Denver's (DU) Professional Psychology Center (PPC), a training clinic for students enrolled in the Psy.D. program at DU's Graduate School of Professional Psychology (GSPP). In doing so, the methods employed by Collins et al. (2007) at Oklahoma State University (OSU) are used as a template and modified to accommodate differences between these two institutions.