在挪威市级医疗保健服务机构工作的医疗保健专业人员与循证实践相关的知识、态度、行为和自我效能:一项横断面调查。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nils Gunnar Landsverk, Nina Rydland Olsen, Therese Brovold
{"title":"在挪威市级医疗保健服务机构工作的医疗保健专业人员与循证实践相关的知识、态度、行为和自我效能:一项横断面调查。","authors":"Nils Gunnar Landsverk, Nina Rydland Olsen, Therese Brovold","doi":"10.1186/s12913-024-11723-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Practicing the process of evidence-based practice (EBP) may be challenging for healthcare professionals and may be affected by their EBP knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior. We have some insight into how Norwegian healthcare professionals and students perceive EBP. However, research on the perception of EBP among primary healthcare professionals working in the Norwegian municipal health service is lacking. This study aimed to map EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals working with older people in the municipal health service in Norway and to examine associations between how they score and their background characteristics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service. We used the revised Norwegian version of the Evidence-based practice profile questionnaire (EBP<sup>2</sup>-N) to measure the healthcare professionals' EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy, operationalized through the five domains of the EBP<sup>2</sup>-N. We calculated the mean scores for each EBP domain across the total sample and for each subgroup of healthcare professionals. We used a one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the differences in mean scores between the professions. We also calculated eta-squared values to determine effect size. We used linear regression analyses to examine associations with background variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 313 healthcare professionals, including nurses, assistant nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and medical doctors, responded to the survey. The total sample scored the highest on the relevance domain, with a mean domain score of 58.9 (95% CI = 58.1-59.7) on a scale ranging from 14 to 70. The practice domain had the lowest score, with a mean domain score of 22.2 (95% CI = 20.8-21.6) on a scale ranging from 9 to 45. Statistically significant differences in mean scores were found between professions in all domains except the confidence domain. The most considerable differences between professions' mean scores were found for the relevance and terminology domains, with eta-squared values of 0.13 and 0.19, respectively. The multivariate regression results showed that EBP training was significantly associated with the sum score of the relevance, terminology, and confidence domain. However, EBP training was not associated with the sum score of the practice and sympathy domains.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Primary healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service hold positive attitudes toward EBP. However, they report a low understanding of research terms, low self-efficacy in performing EBP activities, a lack of perceived compatibility of EBP with professional work, and a low frequency of EBP behavior. Additionally, we observed differences among the included professions in four out of five domains, suggesting that various professions may be unequally prepared for EBP. Finally, our results indicate potential positive outcomes of EBP training. Those who received EBP training exhibited more positive attitudes, a better understanding of common research terms, and higher self-efficacy in performing EBP activities. However, EBP training was not associated with their self-reported EBP behavior.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Retrospectively registered (prior to data analysis) in OSF Preregistration. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP .</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"24 1","pages":"1235"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11476601/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy related to evidence-based practice among healthcare professionals working in the municipal healthcare service in Norway: a cross-sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"Nils Gunnar Landsverk, Nina Rydland Olsen, Therese Brovold\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12913-024-11723-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Practicing the process of evidence-based practice (EBP) may be challenging for healthcare professionals and may be affected by their EBP knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior. We have some insight into how Norwegian healthcare professionals and students perceive EBP. However, research on the perception of EBP among primary healthcare professionals working in the Norwegian municipal health service is lacking. This study aimed to map EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals working with older people in the municipal health service in Norway and to examine associations between how they score and their background characteristics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service. We used the revised Norwegian version of the Evidence-based practice profile questionnaire (EBP<sup>2</sup>-N) to measure the healthcare professionals' EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy, operationalized through the five domains of the EBP<sup>2</sup>-N. We calculated the mean scores for each EBP domain across the total sample and for each subgroup of healthcare professionals. We used a one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the differences in mean scores between the professions. We also calculated eta-squared values to determine effect size. We used linear regression analyses to examine associations with background variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 313 healthcare professionals, including nurses, assistant nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and medical doctors, responded to the survey. The total sample scored the highest on the relevance domain, with a mean domain score of 58.9 (95% CI = 58.1-59.7) on a scale ranging from 14 to 70. The practice domain had the lowest score, with a mean domain score of 22.2 (95% CI = 20.8-21.6) on a scale ranging from 9 to 45. Statistically significant differences in mean scores were found between professions in all domains except the confidence domain. The most considerable differences between professions' mean scores were found for the relevance and terminology domains, with eta-squared values of 0.13 and 0.19, respectively. The multivariate regression results showed that EBP training was significantly associated with the sum score of the relevance, terminology, and confidence domain. However, EBP training was not associated with the sum score of the practice and sympathy domains.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Primary healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service hold positive attitudes toward EBP. However, they report a low understanding of research terms, low self-efficacy in performing EBP activities, a lack of perceived compatibility of EBP with professional work, and a low frequency of EBP behavior. Additionally, we observed differences among the included professions in four out of five domains, suggesting that various professions may be unequally prepared for EBP. Finally, our results indicate potential positive outcomes of EBP training. Those who received EBP training exhibited more positive attitudes, a better understanding of common research terms, and higher self-efficacy in performing EBP activities. However, EBP training was not associated with their self-reported EBP behavior.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Retrospectively registered (prior to data analysis) in OSF Preregistration. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"1235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11476601/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11723-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11723-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:循证实践(EBP)的实践过程可能对医疗保健专业人员具有挑战性,并可能受到他们的EBP知识、态度、自我效能和行为的影响。我们对挪威医护专业人员和学生如何看待循证医学实践有一些了解。然而,关于在挪威市级医疗服务机构工作的初级医疗保健专业人员对EBP的认识还缺乏研究。本研究旨在了解挪威市级医疗卫生服务机构中为老年人服务的医护专业人员对EBP的认知、态度、行为和自我效能,并研究他们的得分与其背景特征之间的关联:我们对挪威市级医疗保健服务机构的医疗保健专业人员进行了一项横断面网络调查。我们使用修订版的挪威语循证实践概况调查问卷(EBP2-N)来测量医护人员的EBP知识、态度、行为和自我效能,并通过EBP2-N的五个领域进行操作。我们计算了所有样本和每个医护专业人员亚群在每个 EBP 领域的平均得分。我们使用单因素组间方差分析(ANOVA)来分析各专业之间平均分的差异。我们还计算了等方值,以确定效应大小。我们使用线性回归分析来研究与背景变量的关联:共有 313 名医疗保健专业人员(包括护士、助理护士、物理治疗师、职业治疗师和医生)对调查做出了回应。总样本在相关性领域得分最高,平均领域得分为 58.9(95% CI = 58.1-59.7),评分范围为 14 至 70 分。实践领域得分最低,平均领域得分为 22.2(95% CI = 20.8-21.6),评分范围为 9-45 分。除信心领域外,各专业之间在所有领域的平均得分都存在明显的统计学差异。专业间平均分差异最大的是相关性和术语领域,等方差值分别为 0.13 和 0.19。多元回归结果表明,EBP 培训与相关性、术语和信心领域的总分显著相关。然而,EBP培训与实践和同情领域的总分无关:挪威市级医疗保健服务机构的基层医疗保健专业人员对EBP持积极态度。结论:挪威市级医疗保健服务机构的基层医疗保健专业人员对 EBP 持积极态度,但他们对研究术语的理解程度较低,开展 EBP 活动的自我效能较低,认为 EBP 与专业工作不相容,EBP 行为的频率较低。此外,我们还观察到,在五个领域中的四个领域,所包含的专业之间存在差异,这表明不同专业为 EBP 所做的准备可能不尽相同。最后,我们的研究结果表明了 EBP 培训的潜在积极成果。接受过 EBP 培训的人表现出更积极的态度,对常用研究术语有更好的理解,在开展 EBP 活动时有更高的自我效能感。然而,EBP 培训与他们自我报告的 EBP 行为无关:追溯注册(数据分析之前)于 OSF 预注册。注册 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP .
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy related to evidence-based practice among healthcare professionals working in the municipal healthcare service in Norway: a cross-sectional survey.

Background: Practicing the process of evidence-based practice (EBP) may be challenging for healthcare professionals and may be affected by their EBP knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior. We have some insight into how Norwegian healthcare professionals and students perceive EBP. However, research on the perception of EBP among primary healthcare professionals working in the Norwegian municipal health service is lacking. This study aimed to map EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals working with older people in the municipal health service in Norway and to examine associations between how they score and their background characteristics.

Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service. We used the revised Norwegian version of the Evidence-based practice profile questionnaire (EBP2-N) to measure the healthcare professionals' EBP knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy, operationalized through the five domains of the EBP2-N. We calculated the mean scores for each EBP domain across the total sample and for each subgroup of healthcare professionals. We used a one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the differences in mean scores between the professions. We also calculated eta-squared values to determine effect size. We used linear regression analyses to examine associations with background variables.

Results: A total of 313 healthcare professionals, including nurses, assistant nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and medical doctors, responded to the survey. The total sample scored the highest on the relevance domain, with a mean domain score of 58.9 (95% CI = 58.1-59.7) on a scale ranging from 14 to 70. The practice domain had the lowest score, with a mean domain score of 22.2 (95% CI = 20.8-21.6) on a scale ranging from 9 to 45. Statistically significant differences in mean scores were found between professions in all domains except the confidence domain. The most considerable differences between professions' mean scores were found for the relevance and terminology domains, with eta-squared values of 0.13 and 0.19, respectively. The multivariate regression results showed that EBP training was significantly associated with the sum score of the relevance, terminology, and confidence domain. However, EBP training was not associated with the sum score of the practice and sympathy domains.

Conclusions: Primary healthcare professionals in the Norwegian municipal healthcare service hold positive attitudes toward EBP. However, they report a low understanding of research terms, low self-efficacy in performing EBP activities, a lack of perceived compatibility of EBP with professional work, and a low frequency of EBP behavior. Additionally, we observed differences among the included professions in four out of five domains, suggesting that various professions may be unequally prepared for EBP. Finally, our results indicate potential positive outcomes of EBP training. Those who received EBP training exhibited more positive attitudes, a better understanding of common research terms, and higher self-efficacy in performing EBP activities. However, EBP training was not associated with their self-reported EBP behavior.

Trial registration: Retrospectively registered (prior to data analysis) in OSF Preregistration. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP .

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
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信