Cargando…

Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To synthesise international research that relates to midwives' use of best available evidence in practice settings and identify key issues relating to the translation of latest evidence into everyday maternity care. BACKGROUND: Midwifery is a research‐informed profession. H...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Leo, Annemarie, Bayes, Sara, Geraghty, Sadie, Butt, Janice
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7328778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31410929
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15027
_version_ 1783552792054464512
author De Leo, Annemarie
Bayes, Sara
Geraghty, Sadie
Butt, Janice
author_facet De Leo, Annemarie
Bayes, Sara
Geraghty, Sadie
Butt, Janice
author_sort De Leo, Annemarie
collection PubMed
description AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To synthesise international research that relates to midwives' use of best available evidence in practice settings and identify key issues relating to the translation of latest evidence into everyday maternity care. BACKGROUND: Midwifery is a research‐informed profession. However, a gap persists in the translation of best available evidence into practice settings, compromising gold standard maternity care and delaying the translation of new knowledge into everyday practice. DESIGN: A five‐step integrative review approach, based on a series of articles published by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for conducting systematic reviews, was used to facilitate development of a search strategy, selection criteria and quality appraisal process, and the extraction and synthesis of data to inform an integrative review. METHODS: The databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Implementation Science Journal and Scopus were searched for relevant articles. The screening and quality appraisal process complied with the PRISMA 2009 checklist. Narrative analysis was used to develop sub‐categories and dimensions from the data, which were then synthesised to form two major categories that together answer the review question. RESULTS: The six articles reviewed report on midwives' use of best available evidence in Australia, the UK and Asia. Two major categories emerged that confirm that although midwifery values evidence‐based practice (EBP), evidence‐informed maternity care is not always employed in clinical settings. Additionally, closure of the evidence‐to‐practice gap in maternity care requires a multidimensional approach. CONCLUSION: Collaborative partnerships between midwives and researchers are necessary to initiate strategies that support midwives' efforts to facilitate the timely movement of best available evidence into practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Understanding midwives' use of best available evidence in practice will direct future efforts towards the development of mechanisms that facilitate the timely uptake of latest evidence by all maternity care providers working in clinical settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7328778
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73287782020-07-02 Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review De Leo, Annemarie Bayes, Sara Geraghty, Sadie Butt, Janice J Clin Nurs Reviews AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To synthesise international research that relates to midwives' use of best available evidence in practice settings and identify key issues relating to the translation of latest evidence into everyday maternity care. BACKGROUND: Midwifery is a research‐informed profession. However, a gap persists in the translation of best available evidence into practice settings, compromising gold standard maternity care and delaying the translation of new knowledge into everyday practice. DESIGN: A five‐step integrative review approach, based on a series of articles published by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for conducting systematic reviews, was used to facilitate development of a search strategy, selection criteria and quality appraisal process, and the extraction and synthesis of data to inform an integrative review. METHODS: The databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Implementation Science Journal and Scopus were searched for relevant articles. The screening and quality appraisal process complied with the PRISMA 2009 checklist. Narrative analysis was used to develop sub‐categories and dimensions from the data, which were then synthesised to form two major categories that together answer the review question. RESULTS: The six articles reviewed report on midwives' use of best available evidence in Australia, the UK and Asia. Two major categories emerged that confirm that although midwifery values evidence‐based practice (EBP), evidence‐informed maternity care is not always employed in clinical settings. Additionally, closure of the evidence‐to‐practice gap in maternity care requires a multidimensional approach. CONCLUSION: Collaborative partnerships between midwives and researchers are necessary to initiate strategies that support midwives' efforts to facilitate the timely movement of best available evidence into practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Understanding midwives' use of best available evidence in practice will direct future efforts towards the development of mechanisms that facilitate the timely uptake of latest evidence by all maternity care providers working in clinical settings. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-14 2019-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7328778/ /pubmed/31410929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15027 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Reviews
De Leo, Annemarie
Bayes, Sara
Geraghty, Sadie
Butt, Janice
Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title_full Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title_fullStr Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title_full_unstemmed Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title_short Midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: An integrative review
title_sort midwives' use of best available evidence in practice: an integrative review
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7328778/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31410929
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15027
work_keys_str_mv AT deleoannemarie midwivesuseofbestavailableevidenceinpracticeanintegrativereview
AT bayessara midwivesuseofbestavailableevidenceinpracticeanintegrativereview
AT geraghtysadie midwivesuseofbestavailableevidenceinpracticeanintegrativereview
AT buttjanice midwivesuseofbestavailableevidenceinpracticeanintegrativereview