Cargando…

A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health

BACKGROUND: The use of evidence-based practice (EBP) is often not reflected in allied health (AH) practitioners’ day-to-day practice (the research-practice gap). Research suggests that considerable differences between and within AH disciplines exist, which require different approaches in order to in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lizarondo, L, Grimmer-Somers, K, Kumar, S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3155856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21847348
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S23144
_version_ 1782210158585184256
author Lizarondo, L
Grimmer-Somers, K
Kumar, S
author_facet Lizarondo, L
Grimmer-Somers, K
Kumar, S
author_sort Lizarondo, L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of evidence-based practice (EBP) is often not reflected in allied health (AH) practitioners’ day-to-day practice (the research-practice gap). Research suggests that considerable differences between and within AH disciplines exist, which require different approaches in order to influence practice behavior. It is therefore important to develop a better understanding of what influences individual AH practitioners’ adoption of evidence into daily practice. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to examine the individual characteristics of AH practitioners which determine their uptake of evidence into practice. METHODS: Studies which examined individual factors or variables that influence research evidence use by any AH practitioner were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included papers was assessed using the Quality Assessment and Validity Tool for Cross-sectional Studies. A narrative summary of the findings was presented. RESULTS: Six studies were included and the methodological quality scores indicated that two were weak and the remainder had moderate–weak quality. The review demonstrated that factors such as educational degree or academic qualification, involvement in research or EBP-related activities, and practitioners’ perceptions, attitudes and beliefs about research and EBP are significant predictors of self-reported research evidence use in AH. The effect of other factors such as professional characteristics, clinical setting/work environment, information-seeking behavior and sociodemographic variables are less clear. Whether there is an interaction effect between evidence-uptake factors has not been tested. CONCLUSION: Improving the research knowledge of clinicians and overcoming negative attitudes toward EBP have the potential to move AH practitioners towards regularly utilizing evidence in practice. Allied health practitioners may benefit from participation in regular educational opportunities such as case studies or journal clubs which can put them at the same level of thinking and awareness of research evidence. Future research should aim to review organizational and contextual factors and explore their interaction with individual determinants of research evidence use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3155856
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31558562011-08-16 A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health Lizarondo, L Grimmer-Somers, K Kumar, S J Multidiscip Healthc Review BACKGROUND: The use of evidence-based practice (EBP) is often not reflected in allied health (AH) practitioners’ day-to-day practice (the research-practice gap). Research suggests that considerable differences between and within AH disciplines exist, which require different approaches in order to influence practice behavior. It is therefore important to develop a better understanding of what influences individual AH practitioners’ adoption of evidence into daily practice. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to examine the individual characteristics of AH practitioners which determine their uptake of evidence into practice. METHODS: Studies which examined individual factors or variables that influence research evidence use by any AH practitioner were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included papers was assessed using the Quality Assessment and Validity Tool for Cross-sectional Studies. A narrative summary of the findings was presented. RESULTS: Six studies were included and the methodological quality scores indicated that two were weak and the remainder had moderate–weak quality. The review demonstrated that factors such as educational degree or academic qualification, involvement in research or EBP-related activities, and practitioners’ perceptions, attitudes and beliefs about research and EBP are significant predictors of self-reported research evidence use in AH. The effect of other factors such as professional characteristics, clinical setting/work environment, information-seeking behavior and sociodemographic variables are less clear. Whether there is an interaction effect between evidence-uptake factors has not been tested. CONCLUSION: Improving the research knowledge of clinicians and overcoming negative attitudes toward EBP have the potential to move AH practitioners towards regularly utilizing evidence in practice. Allied health practitioners may benefit from participation in regular educational opportunities such as case studies or journal clubs which can put them at the same level of thinking and awareness of research evidence. Future research should aim to review organizational and contextual factors and explore their interaction with individual determinants of research evidence use. Dove Medical Press 2011-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3155856/ /pubmed/21847348 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S23144 Text en © 2011 Lizarondo et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Lizarondo, L
Grimmer-Somers, K
Kumar, S
A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title_full A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title_fullStr A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title_short A systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
title_sort systematic review of the individual determinants of research evidence use in allied health
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3155856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21847348
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S23144
work_keys_str_mv AT lizarondol asystematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth
AT grimmersomersk asystematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth
AT kumars asystematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth
AT lizarondol systematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth
AT grimmersomersk systematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth
AT kumars systematicreviewoftheindividualdeterminantsofresearchevidenceuseinalliedhealth