TY - JOUR
T1 - Evidence‐informed practice versus evidence‐based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward the application of evidence into practice
T2 - A comprehensive systematic review of undergraduate students
AU - Kumah, Elizabeth Adjoa
AU - McSherry, Robert
AU - Bettany-Saltikov, Josette
AU - Hamilton, Sharon
AU - Hogg, Julie
AU - Whittaker, Vicki
AU - Van Schaik, Paul
PY - 2019/7/23
Y1 - 2019/7/23
N2 -
Over the past three decades, there has been increasing attention on improving healthcare quality, reliability, and ultimately, patient outcomes, through the provision of healthcare that that is influenced by the best available evidence, and devoid of rituals and tradition (Andre, Aune, & Brænd, 2016; Melnyk, Gallagher‐Ford, Long, & Fineout‐Overholt, 2014; Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996). There is an expectation by professional regulators such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council, United Kingdom (NMC, 2015) and the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC, 2012) that the professional, as part of their accountability applies the best available evidence to inform their clinical decision‐making, roles and responsibilities. This is imperative for several reasons. Firstly, it enhances the delivery of healthcare and improves efficiency. Secondly, it produces better intervention outcomes and promotes transparency. Thirdly, it enhances co‐operation and knowledge sharing among professionals and service users, and ultimately, it improves patient outcomes and enhances job satisfaction. Indeed, the need to guide healthcare practice with evidence has been emphasized by several authors, including Kelly, Heath, Howick, & Greenhalgh, 2015; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011; Scott & McSherry, 2009; Shlonsky & Stern, 2007; Smith & Rennie, 2014; Straus, Glasziou, Richardson, & Haynes, 2011; Tickle‐Degnen & Bedell, 2003; and Sackett et al., 1996. According to these authors, the effective and consistent application of evidence into healthcare practice helps practitioners to deliver the best care for their patients and patient relatives. Nevertheless, there is often an ineffective and inconsistent application of evidence into healthcare practice (McSherry, 2007; Melnyk, 2017; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011).
AB -
Over the past three decades, there has been increasing attention on improving healthcare quality, reliability, and ultimately, patient outcomes, through the provision of healthcare that that is influenced by the best available evidence, and devoid of rituals and tradition (Andre, Aune, & Brænd, 2016; Melnyk, Gallagher‐Ford, Long, & Fineout‐Overholt, 2014; Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996). There is an expectation by professional regulators such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council, United Kingdom (NMC, 2015) and the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC, 2012) that the professional, as part of their accountability applies the best available evidence to inform their clinical decision‐making, roles and responsibilities. This is imperative for several reasons. Firstly, it enhances the delivery of healthcare and improves efficiency. Secondly, it produces better intervention outcomes and promotes transparency. Thirdly, it enhances co‐operation and knowledge sharing among professionals and service users, and ultimately, it improves patient outcomes and enhances job satisfaction. Indeed, the need to guide healthcare practice with evidence has been emphasized by several authors, including Kelly, Heath, Howick, & Greenhalgh, 2015; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011; Scott & McSherry, 2009; Shlonsky & Stern, 2007; Smith & Rennie, 2014; Straus, Glasziou, Richardson, & Haynes, 2011; Tickle‐Degnen & Bedell, 2003; and Sackett et al., 1996. According to these authors, the effective and consistent application of evidence into healthcare practice helps practitioners to deliver the best care for their patients and patient relatives. Nevertheless, there is often an ineffective and inconsistent application of evidence into healthcare practice (McSherry, 2007; Melnyk, 2017; Nevo & Slonim‐Nevo, 2011).
M3 - Article
SN - 1891-1803
JO - Campbell Systematic Reviews
JF - Campbell Systematic Reviews
ER -