Deconstructing Evidence-Based Practice and Its Application in Children to with Mental Health Disorders

This is a mixed methodology study that uses an autoethnographic approach to combine both an autobiography and a survey of practitioners who work in children’s mental health. It is largely about the implementation of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), and the questions, concerns, experiences that I have had, and compared them with those of my fellow practitioners. In addition, it is about my journey as a mental health professional, and how I have come to recognize that in order to achieve the goals I wanted to achieve, I needed to return to university to pursue a Master’s degree. Within the research, I identify and discuss different definitions of EBP and identify several themes. I deconstruct the implementation of EBPs through the lens of Foucault and his notions of governmentality. I offer policy and practice recommendations to improve the implementation of EBP and the services received by children facing mental health issues.

Navigating Evidence-Based Practice: A Presentation for Parents and Caregivers

Prevalence rates for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have increased dramatically, to the current estimation of 1 in 68 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2014). The overall intention of this project is to develop a workshop for families, and caregivers, which will enhance awareness, the importance of evidence-based practice for individuals with ASD and provide local resources that are available. This project involves a literature review of ASDs, evidence-based practice (EBP) and how it affects both families and caregivers. The literature review attempted to answer the question, what are the most popular evidence-based practices and what are the benefits in parents understanding EBP for children with ASD that are currently being utilized today. The purpose of this project is to assist families and caregivers in making well-informed decisions involving the choice of treatments that will have the most positive impact on their children with ASD.

Evidence-Based Practice in PubMed: Are Shared Filters Useful to Health Sciences Academic Users?

Objectives In April 2010, the Université de Montréal’s Health Sciences Library has implemented shared filters in its institutional PubMed account. Most of these filters are designed to highlight resources for evidence-based practice, such as Clinical Queries, Systematic Reviews and Evidence-based Synopsis. We now want to measure how those filters are perceived and used by our users. Methods For one month, data was gathered through an online questionnaire proposed to users of Université de Montréal’s PubMed account. A print version was also distributed to participants in information literacy workshops given by the health sciences librarians. Respondents were restricted to users affiliated to Université de Montréal’s faculties of Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Sciences, Nursing and Pharmacy. Basic user information such as year/program of study or department affiliation was also collected. The questionnaire allowed users to identify the filters they use, assess the relevance of filters, and also suggest new ones. Results Survey results showed that the shared filters of Université de Montreal’s PubMed account were found useful by the majority of respondents. Filters allowing rapid access to secondary resources ranked among the most relevant (Reviews, Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Practice Guidelines and Clinical Evidence). For Clinical Study Queries, Randomized Controlled Trial (Therapy/Narrow) was considered the most useful. Some new shared filters have been suggested by respondents. Finally, 18% of the respondents indicated that they did not quite understand the relevance of filters. Conclusion Based on the survey results, shared filters considered most useful will be kept, some will be enhanced and others removed so that suggested ones could be added. The fact that some respondents did not understand well the relevance of filters could potentially be addressed through our PubMed workshops, online library guides or by renaming some filters in a more meaningful way.

Research for Evidence Based Practice

Online animation resources

The evidence based practice process

This animation reveals the steps for evidence based practice to ensure better outcomes for patients. This file was edited to remove a legacy hyperlink. The link may be best placed in the efolio text for easy editing by academics.

Methodology for evidence-based practice

Protocol writing Methodology for evidence-based practice

protocol writing Methodology for evidence-based practice

protocol writing Methodology for evidence-based practice

Methodology for evidence-based practice

Methodology for evidence-based practice

Methodology for evidence-based practice smaller

Protocol writing Methodology for evidence-based practice smaller player

Factors associated with evidence-based practice among registered nurses in Sweden : a national cross-sectional study

Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is emphasized to increase the quality of care and patient safety. EBP is often described as a process consisting of distinct activities including, formulating questions, searching for information, compiling the appraised information, implementing evidence, and evaluating the resulting practice. To increase registered nurses' (RNs') practice of EBP, variables associated with such activities need to be explored. The aim of the study was to examine individual and organizational factors associated with EBP activities among RNs 2 years post graduation. Methods: A cross-sectional design based on a national sample of RNs was used. Data were collected in 2007 from a cohort of RNs, included in the Swedish Longitudinal Analyses of Nursing Education/Employment study. The sample consisted of 1256 RNs (response rate 76%). Of these 987 RNs worked in healthcare at the time of the data collection. Data was self-reported and collected through annual postal surveys. EBP activities were measured using six single items along with instruments measuring individual and work-related variables. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models. Results: Associated factors were identified for all six EBP activities. Capability beliefs regarding EBP was a significant factor for all six activities (OR = 2.6 - 7.3). Working in the care of older people was associated with a high extent of practicing four activities (OR = 1.7 - 2.2). Supportive leadership and high collective efficacy were associated with practicing three activities (OR = 1.4 - 2.0). Conclusions: To be successful in enhancing EBP among newly graduated RNs, strategies need to incorporate both individually and organizationally directed factors.

Beyond the Pro and Contra of Evidence-Based Practice: Reflections on a Recurring Dilemma at the Core of Social Work

Currently, social work is witnessing a quite polarized debate about what should be the basis for good practice. Simply stated, the different attempts to define the required basis for effective and accountable interventions in social work practice can be grouped in two paradigmatic positions, which seem to be in strong opposition to each other. On the one hand the highly influential evidence based practice movement highlights the necessity to base practice interventions on proven effectiveness from empirical research. Despite some variations, such as between narrow conceptions of evidence based practice (see e.g. McNeece/Thyer, 2004) and broader approaches to it (see e.g. Gambrill, 1999, 2001, 2008), the evidence based practice movement embodies a positivist orientation and more explicitly scientific aspirations of social work by using positivistic empirical strategies. Critics of the evidence based practice movement argue that its narrow epistemological assumptions are not appropriate for the understanding of social phenomena and that evidence based guidelines to practice are insufficient to deal with the extremely complex activities social work practice requires in different and always somewhat unique practice situations (Webb, 2001; Gray & Mc Donald, 2006; Otto, Polutta &Ziegler, 2009). Furthermore critics of evidence based practice argue that it privileges an uncritical and a-political positivism which seems highly problematic in the current climate of welfare state reforms, in which the question ‘what works’ is highly politicized and the legitimacy of professional social work practice is being challenged maybe more than ever before (Kessl, 2009). Both opponents and proponents of evidence based practice argue on the epistemological, the methodological and the ethical level to sustain their point of view and raise fundamental questions about the real nature of social work practice, so that one could get the impression that social work is really at the crossroads between two very different conceptions of social work practice and its further professional development (Stepney, 2009). However, this article is not going to merely rehearse the pro and contra of different positions that are being invoked in the debate about evidence based practice. Instead it aims to go further by identifying the dilemmas underlying these positions which - so it is argued – re-emerge in the debate about evidence based practice, but which are older than this debate. They concern the fundamental ambivalence modern professionalization processes in social work were subjected to from their very beginnings.