(Cronenwett et al., 2007; Cronenwett et al., 2009)
(Estabrooks, 2006; Rycroft-Malone et al., 2004)
An EB approach to clinical decision making is embedded with an appreciation for the continuous generation of knowledge and a philosophy of life-long learning (Craig & Smyth, 2007).
(Haller, Reynolds, & Horsley,1979)
(Haller et al., 1979)
Many of the current approaches to EBP draw on this model.
Tetroe and colleagues (2008) reported more than 33 different terms in use to describe EBP and translational research.
Each of these fits into the schema of EBP and it is important to have a clear understanding of the differences among the conduct of research, research utilization, EBP and translational research.
(Titler et al., 2001; Titler, 2006)
(DiCenso et al., 2005; Newhouse et al., 2005)
The 16 steps taken together incorporate the process for locating and synthesizing knowledge and the systematic use of the change process for integrating and sustaining EB the changes in practice.
Numerous resources exist to assist in framing a searchable question.
(Sackett et al., 2000)
at http://www.guideline.gov/compare/synthesis.aspx
The journal Evidence-Based Nursing has research abstracts and expert commentary on research articles that have met certain quality criteria and that are applicable to nursing practice.
orldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing is a nursing journal focused on syntheses of clinical topics and research abstracts.
The web site http://www.shef.ac.uk/scharr/ir/netting/ has multiple links to appraisal checklists for evaluating studies as does AHRQ http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/strengthsum.htm
(1999)
(2001)
For example, examining the pattern or outcome of a health problem, cohort studies, or case-control studies may be the best match for the question.
In a nursing model, Rosswurm and Larrabee recommend the use of four levels while Stetler’s nursing model contains six.
http://ebmlibrarian.wetpaint.com/page/3.+Appraising+the+evidence
When there is clear evidence to guide practice we need to be certain it is not applied inappropriately to other population groups.
For example many clinical trials have been in adults and serious consideration needs to be taken before results are applied to infants and children or the aged.
A timeline is helpful in laying out the specific steps and estimating how long each will take to complete.
Passive educational interventions such as procedures, lectures, and conferences are not likely to change clinician behavior when used alone.
We need to evaluate and understand whether and how the EBPs we put into place work in real world environments.
In evaluating outcomes we are answering how we know what we are doing is making a difference.
It entails specifying what outcomes are expected to be achieved, baseline data and results that will be collected, and frequency of monitoring.
If the EBP will be related to one’s individual practice then the process may not need to incorporate steps 3-5, 9, and 16, as described above.
If a wider scale implementation is envisioned then systematically going through all steps increases the likelihood of adoption.
(2003)
Hand-hygiene campaigns using products such as ultraviolet lights that show how well hands were cleansed are more effective than those that do not have some observable component.
(Funk, 1995; Pravikoff, 2005).
(Funk, 1995; Pravikoff, 2005).
A number of developments may serve to decrease the barriers.
Professional organizations are increasing their involvement in synthesizing knowledge related to their specialties.
Graduates are entering the workforce with skills in literature searching and knowledge synthesis, and as electronic health records are widely implemented access to the internet and computer resources will increase.
(Pravikoff, 2005)
(Pravikoff, 2005)
Numerous organizations provide concise summaries of the best available evidence from systematic reviews.
The Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations and the Joanna Briggs Institute produce high-quality clinically relevant systematic reviews on all areas of healthcare.
One can search all these resources through the TRIP (Turning Research Into Practice) database at www.tripdatabase.com/
Sackett et al. (2000) defined clinical expertise as the ability to use our clinical skills and past experience to rapidly identify each patient’s unique health state and diagnosis, their individual risks and benefits of potential interventions, and their personal values and expectations.
Clinical expertise is as important as excellent external evidence in recognizing when evidence may be inapplicable or inappropriate for an individual patient (Jennings & Loan, 2001).
It includes assessing knowledge, experience, and understanding of their health behavior and status so they are able to make informed choices.
It is defined as the unique preferences, concerns, and expectations each patient brings to a healthcare encounter and which must be integrated into clinical decisions if they are to serve the patient (Sackett et al., 2000).
(Fatiman, 1997)
Keirns and Goold (2009)
Clinicians have a responsibility to ensure patients have the knowledge to understand the short and long-term consequences of their choices and yet accept that decisions need to be made consistent with the patient’s goals.
There is an understanding of the complexity of EBP yet encouragement for innovation.
It includes the benefits of valuing the use of clinical expertise and patient preferences and values in addition to current best research evidence.