Conectar
Evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) enables consistent and effective healthcare that prioritises patient safety. The competencies of advanced practice nurses (APNs) are essential for implementing EBHC because their professional duties include promoting EBHC.
To identify, critically appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence concerning the EBHC competence of APNs and associated factors.
A systematic review.
CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Medic, ProQuest, and MedNar.
Databases were searched for studies (until 19 September 2023) that examined the EBHC competence and associated factors of APNs were included. Quantitative studies published in English, Swedish and Finnish were included. We followed the JBI methodology for systematic review and performed a narrative synthesis.
The review included 12 quantitative studies, using 15 different instruments, and involved 3163 participants. The quality of the studies was fair. The APNs' EBHC competence areas were categorised into five segments according to the JBI EBHC model. The strongest areas of competencies were in global health as a goal, transferring and implementing evidence, while the weakest were generating and synthesising evidence. Evidence on factors influencing APNs' EBHC competencies was contradictory, but higher levels of education and the presence of an organisational research council may be positively associated with APNs' EBHC competencies.
The development of EBHC competencies for APNs should prioritise evidence generation and synthesis. Elevating the education level of APNs and establishing a Research Council within the organisation can potentially enhance the EBHC competence of APNs.
We should consider weaknesses in EBHC competence when developing education and practical exercises for APNs. This approach will promote the development of APNs' EBHC competence and EBHC implementation in nursing practice.
The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021226578), and reporting followed the PRISMA checklist.
None.
Basing practice on evidence is a widely acknowledged requirement for nursing, but shortcomings still exist. An increased understanding of the actualization of evidence-based nursing (EBN) across different nursing contexts is needed to develop better support for EBN and promote uniform high-quality nursing.
The aim of this study was to compare the actualization of EBN in different organizational contexts in Finland.
Data for this survey were collected in 2021. The actualization of EBN in primary, specialized, and social care organizations was evaluated with the Actualization of Evidence-Based Nursing instrument, nurses' version, which focuses on individual and organizational-level EBN support structures. Differences between (1) specialized and primary healthcare, and (2) different nursing practice settings were tested with Welch's two sample t-test, the Kruskal–Wallis rank sum test, and the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Based on nurse (n = 1020) evaluations, those working in specialized healthcare hold more positive attitudes toward EBN (p = .021) and evaluated their organization's methods for monitoring and evaluating nursing practices (p = .004) more positively than those working in primary healthcare. Regarding different nursing practice settings (n = 1241), the most positive results were observed within preventive healthcare where nurses evaluated their attitudes toward EBN, EBN competence, and personal evidence-based practices more positively compared to other nursing practice settings. The results were parallel regarding several organizational structures for EBN. Positive results were also observed within somatic units at university hospitals, and most negative results were within institutional care settings, health centers, and home care settings.
There is a need for targeted support to strengthen EBN across different organizational contexts, with special attention to those contexts where nursing professionals with lower education levels work. Future research needs to focus on further analyzing the organizational differences and what can be learned, especially from preventive healthcare but also somatic units at university hospitals.
The COVID-19 pandemic has had both direct and indirect impacts on the health of populations worldwide. While racial/ethnic health inequities in COVID-19 infection are now well known (and ongoing), knowledge about the impact of COVID-19 pandemic management on non-COVID-19-related outcomes for Indigenous peoples is less well understood. This article presents the study protocol for the Health Research Council of New Zealand funded project ‘Mā te Mōhio ka Mārama: Impact of COVID-19 on Māori:non-Māori inequities’. The study aims to explore changes in access to healthcare, quality of healthcare and health outcomes for Māori, the Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) and non-Māori during the COVID-19 outbreak period across NZ.
This observational study is framed within a Kaupapa Māori research positioning that includes Kaupapa Māori epidemiology. National datasets will be used to report on access to healthcare, quality of healthcare and health outcomes between Māori and non-Māori during the COVID-19 pandemic in NZ. Study periods are defined as (a) prepandemic period (2015–2019), (b) first pandemic year without COVID-19 vaccines (2020) and (c) pandemic period with COVID-19 vaccines (2021 onwards). Regional and national differences between Māori and non-Māori will be explored in two phases focused on identified health priority areas for NZ including (1) mortality, cancer, long-term conditions, first 1000 days, mental health and (2) rheumatic fever.
This study has ethical approval from the Auckland Health Research Ethics Committee (AHREC AH26253). An advisory group will work with the project team to disseminate the findings of this project via project-specific meetings, peer-reviewed publications and a project-specific website. The overall intention of the project is to highlight areas requiring health policy and practice interventions to address Indigenous inequities in health resulting from COVID-19 pandemic management (both historical and in the future).
To describe the development of the Actualisation of Evidence-Based Nursing instrument targeted at nurses working in clinical practice (ActEBN-nurses), meant for evaluating the actualisation of individual and organisational-level support structures for evidence-based nursing within social and healthcare organisations, and to test its validity and reliability.
Cross-sectional survey.
The FinYHKÄ model was used as the theoretical background of the instrument development and supplemented with the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare, previous literature and items from a previous instrument, the Evidence-Based Practice Process Assessment Scale, with permission of the copyright holders. After two rounds of expert panel and piloting, a national survey was conducted with the instrument in 2021. The target group consisted of nurses working in clinical practice. Psychometric testing included internal consistency (Omega, item analysis) confirmatory factor analysis and t-test for comparison of two groups' differences (sensitivity).
A new instrument, ActEBN-nurses was developed, comprising two parts: Individual-level (32 items, 5-point Likert-scale) and Organisational-level support structures for evidence-based nursing (37 items, 5-point Likert-scale). In total, 1289 nurses participated in the survey. The ActEBN-nurses proved to have good internal consistency in both parts (Omega ω .931 and .966), structural validity and sensitivity based on the two educational levels within the sample. The structure of both parts was slightly modified, based on the CFA modification indices, considering the impact of the reverse worded items in part Individual and redundant items within both parts.
The ActEBN-nurses has promising psychometrics, and it can be used for evaluating individual and organisational-level support structures for evidence-based nursing within social and healthcare organisations.
Evaluation of the support structures within social and healthcare organisations is needed to recognise shortcomings in current structures and advance evidence-based nursing across different contexts.
The authors state that they have adhered to relevant EQUATOR guidelines: STROBE statement for cross-sectional studies.
No patient or public contribution.
by James Belsey, Andrew Reid, Eloise Paine, James Faulkner
BackgroundThe application of cold and pressure to the knee is a common part of post-operative rehabilitation. Skin temperature should be reduced to within 10–15 °C to optimise the therapeutic benefits of cryocompression. The purpose of this study was to investigate the ability of five different cryocompression devices to reduce skin temperature to within this therapeutic range.
Materials and methods32 healthy adult participants (mean (SD): age 26.3 (7.9) years; BMI 24.8 (2.7) kg/m2; 20 males) were recruited for this randomised crossover study. Skin temperature was measured 20 mm distal to the patella using a k-type thermocouple every five minutes during a 30-minute treatment with one of five different cryocompression devices (Physiolab S1, GameReady, Cryo/Cuff, VPulse, and a Gel Wrap). Changes in skin temperature over time were compared to baseline within and between conditions. A subjective rating of comfort was also recorded for each device.
ResultsThe Physiolab S1 and GameReady devices caused significantly lower skin temperatures compared to the VPulse, Gel Wrap, and Cryo/Cuff after 30 minutes (p Conclusions
Only the Physiolab S1 and GameReady devices reduced skin temperature of the knee to within the target range of 10–15 °C. The Physiolab S1 was reportedly more comfortable than the GameReady. Clinicians should be aware of the performance differences of different cryocompression devices to understand which is most likely to provide an effective dose of cold therapy to a joint.
To identify evidence on frontline nurse leaders' competences in evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) and the instruments measuring these competences.
A scoping review.
The search was conducted in June 2021 and complemented in June 2022. The CINAHL, ProQuest, Medline (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science databases and MedNar along with the Finnish database Medic were searched.
The scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs institute methodology for scoping reviews. Titles, abstracts and full-text versions were screened independently by two reviewers according to the inclusion criteria. Deductive-inductive content analysis was used to synthesize data.
A total of 3211 articles published between 1997 and 2022 were screened, which resulted in the inclusion of 16 articles. Although frontline nurse leaders had a positive attitude towards EBHC, they had a lack of implementing EBHC competence into practice. Part of the instruments were used in the studies, and only one focused especially on leaders. None of instruments systematically covered all segments of EBHC.
There is a limited understanding of frontline nurse leaders' competence in EBHC. It is important to understand the importance of EBHC in healthcare and invest in the development of its competence at all levels of leaders. Frontline nurse leaders' support is essential for direct care nurses to use EBHC to ensure the quality of care and benefits to patients. Leaders must enhance their own EBHC competence to become role models for direct care nurses. It is also essential to develop valid and reliable instruments to measure leaders' competence covering all EBHC segments. The results can be utilized in the assessment and development of frontline nurse leaders' EBHC competence by planning and producing education and other competence development methods.
FreshRSS 