在外科护理中使用实施科学:范围审查。

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Annals of surgery Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006518
Anne Lambert-Kerzner, Quintin W O Myers, Ellison Mucharsky, William G Henderson, Ben Harnke, Christina M Stuart, Adam R Dyas, Michael R Bronsert, Katherine L Colborn, Catherine G Velopulos, Robert A Meguid
{"title":"在外科护理中使用实施科学:范围审查。","authors":"Anne Lambert-Kerzner, Quintin W O Myers, Ellison Mucharsky, William G Henderson, Ben Harnke, Christina M Stuart, Adam R Dyas, Michael R Bronsert, Katherine L Colborn, Catherine G Velopulos, Robert A Meguid","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Improvement of surgical care is dependent upon evidence-based practices (EBPs), policies, procedures, and innovations. The objective of this study was to understand and synthesize the use of implementation science (IS) in surgical care.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>This article summarizes the existing literature to identify the frequency and types of EBPs selected for surgical care, IS frameworks that guided the published research, and prominent facilitators and barriers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified version of the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist were used to provide the guidance and standards to conduct this scoping review. We queried Ovid MEDLINE, American Psychological Association PsycINFO, Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for manuscripts published January 2001-June 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search found 3674 citations, of which 129 met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity and volume of innovations within the surgical IS field were vast. The most frequent innovations were in perioperative care, safety in surgery, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Six constructs were identified as both major facilitators and barriers: support from leadership, surgeon and staff knowledge regarding EBPs, relationship/team building, environmental context, data, and resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Identifying these implementation factors used in the surgical field enables us to determine variables that support and inhibit the adoption and implementation of new practices, support practice change, enhance quality and equity of surgical care, and identify research gaps for future IS in surgical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":" ","pages":"591-599"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Implementation Science in Surgical Care: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Anne Lambert-Kerzner, Quintin W O Myers, Ellison Mucharsky, William G Henderson, Ben Harnke, Christina M Stuart, Adam R Dyas, Michael R Bronsert, Katherine L Colborn, Catherine G Velopulos, Robert A Meguid\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006518\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Improvement of surgical care is dependent upon evidence-based practices (EBPs), policies, procedures, and innovations. The objective of this study was to understand and synthesize the use of implementation science (IS) in surgical care.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>This article summarizes the existing literature to identify the frequency and types of EBPs selected for surgical care, IS frameworks that guided the published research, and prominent facilitators and barriers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified version of the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist were used to provide the guidance and standards to conduct this scoping review. We queried Ovid MEDLINE, American Psychological Association PsycINFO, Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for manuscripts published January 2001-June 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search found 3674 citations, of which 129 met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity and volume of innovations within the surgical IS field were vast. The most frequent innovations were in perioperative care, safety in surgery, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Six constructs were identified as both major facilitators and barriers: support from leadership, surgeon and staff knowledge regarding EBPs, relationship/team building, environmental context, data, and resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Identifying these implementation factors used in the surgical field enables us to determine variables that support and inhibit the adoption and implementation of new practices, support practice change, enhance quality and equity of surgical care, and identify research gaps for future IS in surgical care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"591-599\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006518\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006518","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:外科护理的改进有赖于循证实践(EBPs)、政策、程序和创新。本研究旨在了解和总结实施科学(IS)在外科护理中的应用:本文总结了现有文献,以确定外科护理中选择 EBPs 的频率和类型、指导已发表研究的 IS 框架以及突出的促进因素和障碍:方法:Arksey和O'Malley框架的修订版以及《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目扩展范围综述核对表》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist)为开展本范围综述提供了指导和标准。我们查询了Ovid MEDLINE、美国心理学会 PsycINFO、Embase、护理与联合健康文献累积索引、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar,检索 2001 年 1 月至 2023 年 6 月发表的手稿:初步检索发现了 3,674 篇引文,其中 129 篇符合纳入标准。外科手术信息系统领域的创新种类繁多,数量巨大。最常见的创新是围手术期护理、手术安全和术后强化恢复。有六个因素被认为是主要的促进因素和障碍:领导层的支持、外科医生和员工对 EBPs 的了解、关系/团队建设、环境背景、数据和资源:确定外科领域使用的这些实施因素使我们能够确定支持和抑制采用和实施新实践的变量,支持实践变革,提高外科护理的质量和公平性,并确定未来外科护理 IS 的研究缺口。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Implementation Science in Surgical Care: A Scoping Review.

Objective: Improvement of surgical care is dependent upon evidence-based practices (EBPs), policies, procedures, and innovations. The objective of this study was to understand and synthesize the use of implementation science (IS) in surgical care.

Background: This article summarizes the existing literature to identify the frequency and types of EBPs selected for surgical care, IS frameworks that guided the published research, and prominent facilitators and barriers.

Methods: A modified version of the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist were used to provide the guidance and standards to conduct this scoping review. We queried Ovid MEDLINE, American Psychological Association PsycINFO, Embase, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for manuscripts published January 2001-June 2023.

Results: The initial search found 3674 citations, of which 129 met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity and volume of innovations within the surgical IS field were vast. The most frequent innovations were in perioperative care, safety in surgery, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Six constructs were identified as both major facilitators and barriers: support from leadership, surgeon and staff knowledge regarding EBPs, relationship/team building, environmental context, data, and resources.

Conclusion: Identifying these implementation factors used in the surgical field enables us to determine variables that support and inhibit the adoption and implementation of new practices, support practice change, enhance quality and equity of surgical care, and identify research gaps for future IS in surgical care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of surgery
Annals of surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
4.40%
发文量
687
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信