Instruments to Assess Evidence-Based Practice Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.7 3区医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Health Education & Behavior Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1177/10901981231170154

Anderson Martins da Silva, Daniela Pereira Valentim, Adriana Leite Martins, Rosimeire Simprini Padula

{"title":"Instruments to Assess Evidence-Based Practice Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Anderson Martins da Silva, Daniela Pereira Valentim, Adriana Leite Martins, Rosimeire Simprini Padula","doi":"10.1177/10901981231170154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The use of measurement instruments to assess the use of Evidence-Based Practice by health professionals has been frequently reported in studies.Aims: This systematic review aimed to summarize, describe, and evaluate the measurement properties of the instruments that evaluate the use of Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals.Methods: The search was carried out in four databases considering three groups of search terms: evidence-based practice, evaluation, and measurement proprieties. Studies were included that described the use of instruments to assess Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals, with the full-text publication, which analyzed the measurement properties, in English. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.Results: In total, 6,429 were found and only 92 were eligible for data analysis. Forty new instruments were identified most were developed for nursing and physical therapist. The investigators performed at least 1 type of validity test on 73% of the instruments. Reliability was tested at 90%, through internal consistency. Responsiveness was tested on less than half of the instruments (30%). Most of the instruments identified are reliable and valid to measure evidence-based practice in health professionals.Conclusion: Although the Fresno Test remains the most complete instrument, and adequate for use. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist classified 7 (seven) instruments as suitable for the target audience.","PeriodicalId":12974,"journal":{"name":"Health Education & Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"467-476"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981231170154","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of measurement instruments to assess the use of Evidence-Based Practice by health professionals has been frequently reported in studies.

Aims: This systematic review aimed to summarize, describe, and evaluate the measurement properties of the instruments that evaluate the use of Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals.

Methods: The search was carried out in four databases considering three groups of search terms: evidence-based practice, evaluation, and measurement proprieties. Studies were included that described the use of instruments to assess Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals, with the full-text publication, which analyzed the measurement properties, in English. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.

Results: In total, 6,429 were found and only 92 were eligible for data analysis. Forty new instruments were identified most were developed for nursing and physical therapist. The investigators performed at least 1 type of validity test on 73% of the instruments. Reliability was tested at 90%, through internal consistency. Responsiveness was tested on less than half of the instruments (30%). Most of the instruments identified are reliable and valid to measure evidence-based practice in health professionals.

Conclusion: Although the Fresno Test remains the most complete instrument, and adequate for use. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist classified 7 (seven) instruments as suitable for the target audience.

查看原文本刊更多论文

评估医疗保健专业人员循证实践的工具：系统综述。

背景：目的：本系统综述旨在总结、描述和评估评估卫生专业人员使用循证实践的测量工具的测量属性：在四个数据库中进行了搜索，考虑了三组搜索词：循证实践、评估和测量属性。所纳入的研究均介绍了如何使用工具评估卫生专业人员的循证实践，并以英文全文发表，分析了测量特性。研究的方法学质量采用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准进行评估：结果：总共发现了 6,429 项研究，只有 92 项符合数据分析条件。发现了 40 种新工具，其中大部分是为护理和理疗师开发的。调查人员对 73% 的工具进行了至少一种有效性测试。通过内部一致性测试，信度达到 90%。对不到一半的工具（30%）进行了响应性测试。大多数已确定的工具在衡量卫生专业人员的循证实践方面都是可靠有效的：结论：尽管弗雷斯诺测试仍是最完整的工具，也足够使用。基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准核对表将 7 种工具归类为适合目标受众。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Health Education & Behavior PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

2.40%

发文量

期刊介绍： Health Education & Behavior is the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE). The journal publishes authoritative and practical information on critical health issues for a broad range of professionals interested in understanding factors associated with health behavior and health status, and strategies to improve social and behavioral health. The journal is interested in articles directed toward researchers and/or practitioners in health behavior and health education. Empirical research, case study, program evaluation, literature reviews, and articles discussing theories are regularly published.