Centers of Excellence > Hirsh Institute > What's New in EBP Research

frame image
frame image

What's New in Evidence-Based Practice and Translation Research


New Standards Issued by the Institute of Medicine

Report Brief – March 2011: Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews

  • This report contains standards for initiating a systematic review, standards for finding and assessing individual studies, standards for synthesizing the body of evidence, and standards for reporting systematic reviews

Report Brief – March 2011: Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust

  • This report contains 8 standards for developing trustworthy clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).

Publications

Barnsteiner JH et al. 2010. Promoting evidence-based practice and translational research. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 3493):217-225.

This article describes the systems and structures in place to provide staff with resources in order to translate research and deliver EBP, and the multiple initiatives in disseminating evidence at the point of care.

Brouwers MC, Makarski J, Levinson AJ. 2010. A randomized trial to evaluate e-learning interventions designed to improve learner's performance, satisfaction, and self-efficacy with the AGREE II. Implementation Science. http://www.implmentationscience.com/contenst/5/1/29

This is a study protocol to test innovative educational interventions of various intensities and instructional design to promote adoption of the AGREE II and to identify those strategies that are most effective for training.

Carmen KL, Maurer M, Mathews J, Dardess JM, Evers M, Marlo KO. 2010. Evidence that consumers are skeptical about evidence-based health care. Health Affairs, 29(7): doi:10.1377/hlthaff2009.0296.

These authors report that many consumers hold beliefs that are at odds with what policymakers prescribe as evidence-based health care. Most consumers believe that more care means higher quality, better care. Thus, gaps in knowledge and misconceptions may present serious challenges to engaging consumers in evidence-based decision making.

Clark E, Burkett K, Stanko-Lopp D. 2009. Let evidence guide every new decision (LEGEND): an evidence evaluation system for point-of-care clinicians and guideline development teams. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15:1054-1060.

This article describes tools developed for use by teams of point-of-care clinicians to improve access to evidence evaluation.

Evensen AE, Sanson-Fisher R, D’Este C, Fitzgerald M. 2010. Trends in publications regarding evidence practice gaps: A literature review. Implementation Science, 5:11. Open access journal: http://www.implementationscience.com/content/5/1/11.

These authors selected nine (9) guidelines and searched for intervention studies on improving adherence to the CPG recommendations. Results showed small numbers of well-designed studies and low rates of physician participating in these trials.

Hagedorn HJ, Heideman PW. 2010. The relationship between baseline Organizational Readiness to Change assessment subscale scores and implementation of hepatitis prevention services in substance use disorders treatment clinics: a case study. Implementation Science. http://www.implementationscience.com/content/5/1/46

This study suggests that the ORCA is able to measure differences in organizational factors at baseline between clinics that reported high and low implementation of practice recommendations.

Hasson H. 2010. Systematic evaluation of implementation fidelity of complex interventions in health and social care. Implementation Science. http://www.implementationscience.com/content/5/1/67

This protocol plans to use a multiple case study approach to empirically test the Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Getzche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. 2009. The PRISMA Statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151:W-65-W-94. Published at www.annals.org on July 21, 2009.

An international group has developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses), which builds on the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The goal is to improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, thus improving their value to clinicians, policy makers and others. 

Luce BR, Drummond M, Jonsson B et al. 2010. EBM, HTA, and CER: Clearing the confusion. Milbank Quarterly, 88(20:256-276.

The authors address the issue of lack of clarity surrounding use of the terms evidence-based medicine, health technology assessment, and comparative effectiveness research. They propose an organizing framework to both differentiate these terms and clarify the relationships among these terms. They propose the following definitions:

  • EBM: Evidence synthesis and decision process to assist patients’ and physicians’ decisions and to develop clinical practice guidelines.
  • CER: Evidence generation and evidence synthesis to compare interventions in routine practice settings; outputs of CER useful for CPG development, EBM, and broader social and economic assessment of health technologies.
  • HTA: Method of evidence synthesis that considers evidence regarding clinical effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, and social, legal, and ethical aspects of use of health technologies. Major use of HTA is informing reimbursement and coverage decisions.

Manchikanti L, Datta S, Gupta S, Munglani R, Bryce DA, Ward SP et al. 2010. A critical review of the American Pain Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for interventional techniques: part 2. Therapeutic interventions. Pain Physician, 13(4):E215-64.

This article describes a reassessment of the research base used to generate the APS guideline recommendations for low back pain treatment, and concludes that the original guideline developers utilized multiple studies inappropriately and excluded appropriate studies. This article reinforces the needs to critically review and assess for potential bias in all CPGs before their adoption.

Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, et al. 2010. Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ, 341:c3515.

The purpose of this meta-epidemiological study was to examine the presence and extent of small study effects in clinical osteoarthritis research. 13 meta-analyses were included in this analysis. The results showed that treatment effects, on average, were more beneficial in small than in large trials. The authors conclude that small study effects can often distort results of meta-analyses, and recommend that the influence of small trials in estimated treatment effects should be routinely assessed.

Pare G, Sicotte C, Poba-Nzaou P, Batouzakis G. 2011. Clinicians' perceptions of organizational readiness for change in the context of clinical information system projects: insights from two cross-sectional surveys. Implementation Science. http://www.implementationscience.com/contenct/6/1/15

This study found that change appropriateness, organizational flexibility, vision clarity and change efficacy explained organizational readiness. A second site found that an effective change champion and collective self-efficacy were also important.

Robeson P, Dobbins M, DeCorby K, Tirilis D. 2010. Facilitating access to pre-processed research evidence in public health. BMC Public Health, 10:95. Open Access.

This paper describes an existing hierarchy of pre-processed evidence and its adaptation to public health setting.

Salbach NM, Jaglal SB. 2010. Creation and validation of the evidence-based practice confidence scale for health care professionals. Journal of Evaluation Clinical Practice, July 13 (Epub ahead of print).

This article describes the creation and psychometric testing of a scale measuring nurses belief in their ability to implement evidence-based practice.

Shirey MR et al. 2011. Showcasing differences between quality improvement, evidence-based practice and research. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing. 42(2):57-69.

This article presents a synthesis of the literature that discusses differences between QI, EBP and research.

Smith JR, Donze A. 2010. Assessing environmental readiness: first steps in developing an evidence-based practice implementation culture. Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing, 24(1):61-71.

This article provides practitioners with an understanding of how to evaluate environmental readiness for implementation of EBP within their organization.

Solomon MZ. 2010. The ethical urgency of advancing implementation science. The American Journal of Bioethics. 10(8):31-32.

This author calls for making sure that patient-centered outcomes research refers to implementation science as well as comparative effectiveness studies.

Squires JE, Estabrooks CA, Gustavsson P, Wallin L. 2011. Individual determinants of research utilization by nurses: a systematic review update. Implementation Science. http://www.implementationscience.com/content/6/1/1

This review reinforced conclusions of the previous review with respect to positive relationships between general research utilization and beliefs and attitudes, and current role, as well as attending conferences/in-services, having a graduate degree in nursing, working in a specialty area, and job satisfaction.

Tremblay D, Drouin D, Lang A, Roberge D, Ritchie J, Plante A. 2010. Interprofessional collaborative practice within cancer teams: translating evidence into action. A mixed methods study protocol. Implementation Science, 5(1):53 (Epub ahead of print; open access journal).

This planned study will use a practical trial design to determine the interventions and sources of support most cohesive to the uptake of evidence and building the capacity to sustain new interprofessional collaborative practice patterns.

Western Journal of Nursing Research. Special Issue: Evidence-based Practice, 33(3): April 2011.

This issue is devoted to advances in EBP. Following an editorial by Marita Titler, the volume is organized into 3 sections: innovative approaches and programs to foster BPs; environment and leadership; and exemplars.