Taking into account patient preferences in personalised care: Blending types of nursing knowledge in evidence‐based practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ria den Hertog ◽  
Theo Niessen
Keyword(s):  
Patient Preferences ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Nursing Knowledge

Doctor of Nursing Practice: Integrating Theory, Research, and Evidence-Based Practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget R. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
The Body ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Advanced Practice ◽  
Nursing Knowledge ◽  
Doctor Of Nursing Practice ◽  
Practice Nurses ◽  
Theory Research

A strong relationship exists between theory, research, and evidence-based practice; and these three entities are necessary to guide practice and contribute to the body of nursing knowledge. Doctor of nursing practice graduates can serve as leaders as they enter into their respective clinical practice areas. Through education of peers, along with translation and evaluation of current theoretical literature and empirical data, these advanced practice nurses can positively influence nursing practice and patient care.

scholarly journals An overview of research designs relevant to nursing: Part 1: quantitative research designs

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 502-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valmi D. Sousa ◽  
Martha Driessnack ◽  
Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Research ◽  
Nursing Care ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Relevant Research ◽  
Care Needs ◽  
Nursing Knowledge ◽  
Research Designs

This three part series of articles provides a brief overview of relevant research designs in nursing. The first article in the series presents the most frequently used quantitative research designs. Strategies for non-experimental and experimental research designs used to generate and refine nursing knowledge are described. In addition, the importance of quantitative designs and the role they play in developing evidence-based practice are discussed. Nursing care needs to be determined by the results of sound research rather than by clinical preferences or tradition.

Aesthetics and Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing: An Oxymoron?

2004 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn Freshwater
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Healthcare Provision ◽  
Nursing Theory ◽  
Nursing Knowledge ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Scientific Base

Nursing theory and differing sources of nursing knowledge have focused the argument that nursing theory and nursing practice must be founded on a scientific base. The phrase “evidence based” is increasingly entering the discourse around nursing effectiveness and has captured the attention of managers, because of its seeming potential to rationalize costs in healthcare provision, and researchers, because of its association with problems related to lack of adoption of research findings in nursing. A potential exists to broaden the chasm between the art and the science of nursing, when the art of nursing is gaining credibility. This paper challenges the current of evidence-based practice. It argues that the two concepts, when viewed through the postmodern lens, are not necessarily an oxymoron.

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.

What Does Evidence-Based Practice Mean to You? A Follow-Up Study Examining School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists' Perspectives on Evidence-Based Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
Katrina Fulcher-Rood ◽  
Anny Castilla-Earls ◽  
Jeff Higginbotham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
School Based ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Ebp Implementation

Purpose The current investigation is a follow-up from a previous study examining child language diagnostic decision making in school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to examine the SLPs' perspectives regarding the use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in their clinical work. Method Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs who previously participated in an earlier study by Fulcher-Rood et al. 2018). SLPs were asked questions regarding their definition of EBP, the value of research evidence, contexts in which they implement scientific literature in clinical practice, and the barriers to implementing EBP. Results SLPs' definitions of EBP differed from current definitions, in that SLPs only included the use of research findings. SLPs seem to discuss EBP as it relates to treatment and not assessment. Reported barriers to EBP implementation were insufficient time, limited funding, and restrictions from their employment setting. SLPs found it difficult to translate research findings to clinical practice. SLPs implemented external research evidence when they did not have enough clinical expertise regarding a specific client or when they needed scientific evidence to support a strategy they used. Conclusions SLPs appear to use EBP for specific reasons and not for every clinical decision they make. In addition, SLPs rely on EBP for treatment decisions and not for assessment decisions. Educational systems potentially present other challenges that need to be considered for EBP implementation. Considerations for implementation science and the research-to-practice gap are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document