首页> 外文期刊>Implementation Science >Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review
【24h】

Interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing: a systematic review

机译:旨在增加护理研究用途的干预措施:系统评价

获取原文
           

摘要

Background There has been considerable interest recently in developing and evaluating interventions to increase research use by clinicians. However, most work has focused on medical practices; and nursing is not well represented in existing systematic reviews. The purpose of this article is to report findings from a systematic review of interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. Objective To assess the evidence on interventions aimed at increasing research use in nursing. Methods A systematic review of research use in nursing was conducted using databases (Medline, CINAHL, Healthstar, ERIC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Psychinfo), grey literature, ancestry searching (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), key informants, and manual searching of journals. Randomized controlled trials and controlled before- and after-studies were included if they included nurses, if the intervention was explicitly aimed at increasing research use or evidence-based practice, and if there was an explicit outcome to research use. Methodological quality was assessed using pre-existing tools. Data on interventions and outcomes were extracted and categorized using a pre-established taxonomy. Results Over 8,000 titles were screened. Three randomized controlled trials and one controlled before- and after-study met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of included studies was generally low. Three investigators evaluated single interventions. The most common intervention was education. Investigators measured research use using a combination of surveys (three studies) and compliance with guidelines (one study). Researcher-led educational meetings were ineffective in two studies. Educational meetings led by a local opinion leader (one study) and the formation of multidisciplinary committees (one study) were both effective at increasing research use. Conclusion Little is known about how to increase research use in nursing, and the evidence to support or refute specific interventions is inconclusive. To advance the field, we recommend that investigators: (1) use theoretically informed interventions to increase research use, (2) measure research use longitudinally using theoretically informed and psychometrically sound measures of research use, as well as, measuring patient outcomes relevant to the intervention, and (3) use more robust and methodologically sound study designs to evaluate interventions. If investigators aim to establish a link between using research and improved patient outcomes they must first identify those interventions that are effective at increasing research use.
机译:背景技术近来,人们对开发和评估干预措施以增加临床医生的研究兴趣非常感兴趣。但是,大多数工作都集中在医疗实践上。并且在现有的系统评价中护理没有很好地体现出来。本文的目的是报告对旨在增加护理研究用途的干预措施进行系统评估的结果。目的评估旨在增加护理研究用途的干预措施的证据。方法使用数据库(Medline,CINAHL,Healthstar,ERIC,Cochrane对照试验中央登记册和Psychinfo),灰色文献,祖先检索(Cochrane系统评价数据库),关键信息提供者和系统对护理研究用途进行系统评价。手动搜索期刊。如果包括护士,干预措施明确旨在增加研究用途或循证实践,以及研究用途有明确结果,则包括随机对照试验和对照研究前后。使用现有工具评估方法学质量。使用预先建立的分类法提取干预措施和结果的数据并进行分类。结果筛选了8,000多个标题。 3项随机对照试验和1项对照研究前和研究后符合纳入标准。纳入研究的方法学质量通常较低。三名研究者评估了单一干预措施。最常见的干预是教育。研究人员使用调查(三项研究)和对准则的遵循性(一项研究)的组合来衡量研究用途。由研究人员主持的教育会议在两项研究中均无效。由当地意见领袖领导的教育会议(一项研究)和成立多学科委员会(一项研究)都有效地增加了研究的使用。结论关于如何增加护理方面的研究用途知之甚少,支持或驳斥特定干预措施的证据尚无定论。为了推动这一领域的发展,我们建议研究者:(1)使用理论上合理的干预措施来增加研究使用;(2)使用理论上合理的和心理上合理的研究使用措施,纵向测量研究使用,以及测量与治疗相关的患者结果(3)使用更可靠,方法更合理的研究设计来评估干预措施。如果研究人员希望在使用研究与改善患者预后之间建立联系,则他们必须首先确定对增加研究使用有效的干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号