Cargando…

Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest recently in developing and evaluating interventions to increase research use by clinicians. However, most work has focused on medical practices; and nursing is not well represented in existing systematic reviews. The purpose of this article is to repo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson, David S, Estabrooks, Carole A, Scott-Findlay, Shannon, Moore, Katherine, Wallin, Lars
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1878499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17498301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-15
_version_ 1782133581059981312
author Thompson, David S
Estabrooks, Carole A
Scott-Findlay, Shannon
Moore, Katherine
Wallin, Lars
author_facet Thompson, David S
Estabrooks, Carole A
Scott-Findlay, Shannon
Moore, Katherine
Wallin, Lars
author_sort Thompson, David S
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest recently in developing and evaluating interventions to increase research use by clinicians. However, most work has focused on medical practices; and nursing is not well represented in existing systematic reviews. The purpose of this article is to report findings from a systematic review of interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence on interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. METHODS: A systematic review of research use in nursing was conducted using databases (Medline, CINAHL, Healthstar, ERIC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Psychinfo), grey literature, ancestry searching (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), key informants, and manual searching of journals. Randomized controlled trials and controlled before- and after-studies were included if they included nurses, if the intervention was explicitly aimed at increasing research use or evidence-based practice, and if there was an explicit outcome to research use. Methodological quality was assessed using pre-existing tools. Data on interventions and outcomes were extracted and categorized using a pre-established taxonomy. RESULTS: Over 8,000 titles were screened. Three randomized controlled trials and one controlled before- and after-study met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of included studies was generally low. Three investigators evaluated single interventions. The most common intervention was education. Investigators measured research use using a combination of surveys (three studies) and compliance with guidelines (one study). Researcher-led educational meetings were ineffective in two studies. Educational meetings led by a local opinion leader (one study) and the formation of multidisciplinary committees (one study) were both effective at increasing research use. CONCLUSION: Little is known about how to increase research use in nursing, and the evidence to support or refute specific interventions is inconclusive. To advance the field, we recommend that investigators: (1) use theoretically informed interventions to increase research use, (2) measure research use longitudinally using theoretically informed and psychometrically sound measures of research use, as well as, measuring patient outcomes relevant to the intervention, and (3) use more robust and methodologically sound study designs to evaluate interventions. If investigators aim to establish a link between using research and improved patient outcomes they must first identify those interventions that are effective at increasing research use.
format Text
id pubmed-1878499
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-18784992007-05-29 Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review Thompson, David S Estabrooks, Carole A Scott-Findlay, Shannon Moore, Katherine Wallin, Lars Implement Sci Systematic Review BACKGROUND: There has been considerable interest recently in developing and evaluating interventions to increase research use by clinicians. However, most work has focused on medical practices; and nursing is not well represented in existing systematic reviews. The purpose of this article is to report findings from a systematic review of interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence on interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. METHODS: A systematic review of research use in nursing was conducted using databases (Medline, CINAHL, Healthstar, ERIC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Psychinfo), grey literature, ancestry searching (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), key informants, and manual searching of journals. Randomized controlled trials and controlled before- and after-studies were included if they included nurses, if the intervention was explicitly aimed at increasing research use or evidence-based practice, and if there was an explicit outcome to research use. Methodological quality was assessed using pre-existing tools. Data on interventions and outcomes were extracted and categorized using a pre-established taxonomy. RESULTS: Over 8,000 titles were screened. Three randomized controlled trials and one controlled before- and after-study met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of included studies was generally low. Three investigators evaluated single interventions. The most common intervention was education. Investigators measured research use using a combination of surveys (three studies) and compliance with guidelines (one study). Researcher-led educational meetings were ineffective in two studies. Educational meetings led by a local opinion leader (one study) and the formation of multidisciplinary committees (one study) were both effective at increasing research use. CONCLUSION: Little is known about how to increase research use in nursing, and the evidence to support or refute specific interventions is inconclusive. To advance the field, we recommend that investigators: (1) use theoretically informed interventions to increase research use, (2) measure research use longitudinally using theoretically informed and psychometrically sound measures of research use, as well as, measuring patient outcomes relevant to the intervention, and (3) use more robust and methodologically sound study designs to evaluate interventions. If investigators aim to establish a link between using research and improved patient outcomes they must first identify those interventions that are effective at increasing research use. BioMed Central 2007-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC1878499/ /pubmed/17498301 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-15 Text en Copyright © 2007 Thompson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Thompson, David S
Estabrooks, Carole A
Scott-Findlay, Shannon
Moore, Katherine
Wallin, Lars
Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title_full Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title_fullStr Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title_short Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
title_sort interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1878499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17498301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-15
work_keys_str_mv AT thompsondavids interventionsaimedatincreasingresearchuseinnursingasystematicreview
AT estabrookscarolea interventionsaimedatincreasingresearchuseinnursingasystematicreview
AT scottfindlayshannon interventionsaimedatincreasingresearchuseinnursingasystematicreview
AT moorekatherine interventionsaimedatincreasingresearchuseinnursingasystematicreview
AT wallinlars interventionsaimedatincreasingresearchuseinnursingasystematicreview