The role of patient preferences in nursing decision‐making in evidence‐based practice: excellent nurses’ communication tools

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (9) ◽  
pp. 1987-1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ria Den Hertog ◽  
Theo Niessen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Communication Tools

scholarly journals Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study

10.2196/17718 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. e17718
Author(s):  
Monika Jurkeviciute ◽  
Henrik Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Professional Experiences

Background Evidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. Objective This study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. Methods This study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. Results Evidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. Conclusions Initiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.

scholarly journals Exploring the Use of Evidence From the Development and Evaluation of an Electronic Health (eHealth) Trial: Case Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Jurkeviciute ◽  
Henrik Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Professional Experiences

BACKGROUND Evidence-based practice refers to building clinical decisions on credible research evidence, professional experience, and patient preferences. However, there is a growing concern that evidence in the context of electronic health (eHealth) is not sufficiently used when forming policies and practice of health care. In this context, using evaluation and research evidence in clinical or policy decisions dominates the discourse. However, the use of additional types of evidence, such as professional experience, is underexplored. Moreover, there might be other ways of using evidence than in clinical or policy decisions. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to analyze how different types of evidence (such as evaluation outcomes [including patient preferences], professional experiences, and existing scientific evidence from other research) obtained within the development and evaluation of an eHealth trial are used by diverse stakeholders. An additional aim was to identify barriers to the use of evidence and ways to support its use. METHODS This study was built on a case of an eHealth trial funded by the European Union. The project included 4 care centers, 2 research and development companies that provided the web-based physical exercise program and an activity monitoring device, and 2 science institutions. The qualitative data collection included 9 semistructured interviews conducted 8 months after the evaluation was concluded. The data analysis concerned (1) activities and decisions that were made based on evidence after the project ended, (2) evidence used for those activities and decisions, (3) in what way the evidence was used, and (4) barriers to the use of evidence. RESULTS Evidence generated from eHealth trials can be used by various stakeholders for decisions regarding clinical integration of eHealth solutions, policy making, scientific publishing, research funding applications, eHealth technology, and teaching. Evaluation evidence has less value than professional experiences to local decision making regarding eHealth integration into clinical practice. Professional experiences constitute the evidence that is valuable to the highest variety of activities and decisions in relation to eHealth trials. When using existing scientific evidence related to eHealth trials, it is important to consider contextual relevance, such as location or disease. To support the use of evidence, it is suggested to create possibilities for health care professionals to gain experience, assess a few rather than a large number of variables, and design for shorter iterative cycles of evaluation. CONCLUSIONS Initiatives to support and standardize evidence-based practice in the context of eHealth should consider the complexities in how the evidence is used in order to achieve better uptake of evidence in practice. However, one should be aware that the assumption of fact-based decision making in organizations is misleading. In order to create better chances that the evidence produced would be used, this should be addressed through the design of eHealth trials.

scholarly journals Bridging the Gap: The Importance of Evidence-Based Practice and Collaboration within Sports Performance

IUSCA Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Griffin Waller
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Exercise Physiology ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Human Anatomy ◽  
Professional Relationships ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Job Responsibilities ◽  
Strength And Conditioning

The role of a Strength & Conditioning Coach (S&CC) has evolved tremendously over the years. Formerly, these positions were seen as novelties, with responsibilities centered solely around improving strength and conditioning qualities. Currently, job responsibilities can stretch from not only applying strength and conditioning principles, but also being competent in biomechanics, human anatomy, exercise physiology, motor learning, sports nutrition, and sports psychology, to name a few. It’s vital for S&CCs to lean on relevant research, while collaborating with both direct and indirect professionals to guide decision making. Adopting an evidence-based practice (EBP) should be the first step when determining the best intervention in any situation. Applying this to strength and conditioning would be to take a systematic approach to training athletes and clients based on the best evidence from current peer-reviewed research, in conjunction with professional experience and judgment. Ultimately, EBP can provide S&CCs with strength of certainty regarding their decisions. In addition to the research, individual experience and observation, in conjunction with the preferences and constraints of the environment, are just as important. Both scientific research and practical experience are necessary and complementary components of furthering EBP. Developing the best EBP will require a combined approach, in which coaches and researchers work in collaboration to provide the greatest degree of insight into the effects of any intervention. Cultivating sustainable, integrated, and open-minded work relationships can heavily influence how we’re assimilating important information. Sharing information and an adopting an open-minded approach can lead to skills, techniques, and research being shared far more easily. Ultimately, integrating an EBP and fostering quality professional relationships at work sets the foundation to optimize decision-making and minimize interference within the development of our athletes.

Debates in Dysphagia Management: How Do You Use Evidence-Based Practice in Your Dysphagia Patient Care?

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Do So

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.

Practice-Based Evidence

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 389-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Eppley ◽  
Patrick Shannon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Reading Education ◽  
Academic Literacies ◽  
Equitable Distribution ◽  
Half Century

We have two goals for this article: to question the efficacy of evidence-based practice as the foundation of reading education policy and to propose practice-based evidence as a viable, more socially just alternative. In order to reach these goals, we describe the limits of reading policies of the last half century and argue for the possibilities of policies aimed at more equitable distribution of academic literacies among all social groups, recognition of subaltern groups’ literacies, and representation of the local in regional and global decision making.

scholarly journals The PICO strategy for the research question construction and evidence search

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 508-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Mamédio da Costa Santos ◽  
Cibele Andrucioli de Mattos Pimenta ◽  
Moacyr Roberto Cuce Nobre
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Review Of The Literature

Evidence based practice is the use of the best scientific evidence to support the clinical decision making. The identification of the best evidence requires the construction of an appropriate research question and review of the literature. This article describes the use of the PICO strategy for the construction of the research question and bibliographical search.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document