残疾护理的循证实践和知识管理:刚性约束还是流动支持?

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Isabella Pistone, Allan Lidström, Ingemar Bohlin, Thomas Schneider, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, M. Sager
{"title":"残疾护理的循证实践和知识管理:刚性约束还是流动支持?","authors":"Isabella Pistone, Allan Lidström, Ingemar Bohlin, Thomas Schneider, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, M. Sager","doi":"10.1332/174426421x16390538025881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Although increasingly accepted in some corners of social work, critics have claimed that evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies run contrary to local care practices and result in an EBP straitjacket and epistemic injustice. These are serious concerns, especially in relation to already marginalised clients.Aims and objectives: Against the backdrop of criticism against EBP, this study explores the ramifications of the Swedish state-governed knowledge infrastructure, ‘management-by-knowledge’, for social care practices at two care units for persons with intellectual disabilities.Methods: Data generated from ethnographic observations and interviews were analysed by applying a conceptual framework of epistemic injustice; also analysed were national, regional and local knowledge products within management-by-knowledge related to two daily activity (DA) units at a social care provider in Sweden.Findings: In this particular case of disability care, no obvious risks of epistemic injustice were discovered in key knowledge practices of management-by-knowledge. Central methodologies of national agencies did include perspectives from social workers and clients, as did regional infrastructures. Locally, there were structures in place that focused on creating a dynamic interplay between knowledge coming from various forms of evidence, including social workers’ and clients’ own knowledge and experience.Discussion and conclusions: Far from being a straitjacket, in the case studied management-by-knowledge may be understood as offering fluid support. Efforts which aim at improving care for people with disabilities might benefit from organisational support structures that enable dynamic interactions between external knowledge and local practices.Key messagesExamining one case of disability care in Sweden, both social workers’ and clients’ experiences were included in EBP infrastructures.In this study, Swedish EBP infrastructures functioned more like fluid support than a straitjacket.Organisational structures that combine different knowledge sources at service providers can minimise the risk of epistemic injustice within social care.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-based practice and management-by-knowledge of disability care: rigid constraint or fluid support?\",\"authors\":\"Isabella Pistone, Allan Lidström, Ingemar Bohlin, Thomas Schneider, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, M. Sager\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/174426421x16390538025881\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Although increasingly accepted in some corners of social work, critics have claimed that evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies run contrary to local care practices and result in an EBP straitjacket and epistemic injustice. These are serious concerns, especially in relation to already marginalised clients.Aims and objectives: Against the backdrop of criticism against EBP, this study explores the ramifications of the Swedish state-governed knowledge infrastructure, ‘management-by-knowledge’, for social care practices at two care units for persons with intellectual disabilities.Methods: Data generated from ethnographic observations and interviews were analysed by applying a conceptual framework of epistemic injustice; also analysed were national, regional and local knowledge products within management-by-knowledge related to two daily activity (DA) units at a social care provider in Sweden.Findings: In this particular case of disability care, no obvious risks of epistemic injustice were discovered in key knowledge practices of management-by-knowledge. Central methodologies of national agencies did include perspectives from social workers and clients, as did regional infrastructures. Locally, there were structures in place that focused on creating a dynamic interplay between knowledge coming from various forms of evidence, including social workers’ and clients’ own knowledge and experience.Discussion and conclusions: Far from being a straitjacket, in the case studied management-by-knowledge may be understood as offering fluid support. Efforts which aim at improving care for people with disabilities might benefit from organisational support structures that enable dynamic interactions between external knowledge and local practices.Key messagesExamining one case of disability care in Sweden, both social workers’ and clients’ experiences were included in EBP infrastructures.In this study, Swedish EBP infrastructures functioned more like fluid support than a straitjacket.Organisational structures that combine different knowledge sources at service providers can minimise the risk of epistemic injustice within social care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51652,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence & Policy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16390538025881\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421x16390538025881","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:尽管在社会工作的某些角落越来越被接受,但批评者声称,循证实践(EBP)方法与当地护理实践背道而驰,并导致EBP束缚和认知不公。这些都是严重的问题,尤其是对已经被边缘化的客户而言。目的和目标:在对EBP的批评背景下,本研究探讨了瑞典国家管理的知识基础设施“知识管理”对两个智障人士护理单位的社会护理实践的影响。方法:通过应用认知不公正的概念框架对民族志观察和访谈产生的数据进行分析;还分析了瑞典一家社会保健提供者的两个日常活动(DA)单元中与知识管理相关的国家、区域和地方知识产品。结果:在这个特殊的残疾护理案例中,在知识管理的关键知识实践中没有发现明显的认知不公正风险。国家机构的中心方法确实包括社会工作者和客户的观点,区域基础设施也是如此。在当地,有一些结构专注于创造来自各种形式证据的知识之间的动态相互作用,包括社会工作者和客户自己的知识和经验。讨论和结论:在研究的案例中,知识管理远不是一种束缚,它可以被理解为提供流动的支持。旨在改善对残疾人护理的努力可能受益于使外部知识和当地实践之间能够动态互动的组织支持结构。考察瑞典的一个残疾护理案例,社会工作者和客户的经验都包括在EBP基础设施中。在这项研究中,瑞典EBP基础设施的功能更像是流体支撑而不是紧身衣。结合服务提供者的不同知识来源的组织结构可以最大限度地减少社会护理中认识不公正的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence-based practice and management-by-knowledge of disability care: rigid constraint or fluid support?
Background: Although increasingly accepted in some corners of social work, critics have claimed that evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies run contrary to local care practices and result in an EBP straitjacket and epistemic injustice. These are serious concerns, especially in relation to already marginalised clients.Aims and objectives: Against the backdrop of criticism against EBP, this study explores the ramifications of the Swedish state-governed knowledge infrastructure, ‘management-by-knowledge’, for social care practices at two care units for persons with intellectual disabilities.Methods: Data generated from ethnographic observations and interviews were analysed by applying a conceptual framework of epistemic injustice; also analysed were national, regional and local knowledge products within management-by-knowledge related to two daily activity (DA) units at a social care provider in Sweden.Findings: In this particular case of disability care, no obvious risks of epistemic injustice were discovered in key knowledge practices of management-by-knowledge. Central methodologies of national agencies did include perspectives from social workers and clients, as did regional infrastructures. Locally, there were structures in place that focused on creating a dynamic interplay between knowledge coming from various forms of evidence, including social workers’ and clients’ own knowledge and experience.Discussion and conclusions: Far from being a straitjacket, in the case studied management-by-knowledge may be understood as offering fluid support. Efforts which aim at improving care for people with disabilities might benefit from organisational support structures that enable dynamic interactions between external knowledge and local practices.Key messagesExamining one case of disability care in Sweden, both social workers’ and clients’ experiences were included in EBP infrastructures.In this study, Swedish EBP infrastructures functioned more like fluid support than a straitjacket.Organisational structures that combine different knowledge sources at service providers can minimise the risk of epistemic injustice within social 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
Evidence & Policy
Evidence & Policy SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
53
×
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