TY - JOUR
T1 - Tools to assess evidence-based practice behaviour among healthcare professionals
AU - Oude Rengerink, Katrien
AU - Zwolsman, Sandra E.
AU - Ubbink, Dirk T.
AU - Mol, Ben W. J.
AU - van Dijk, Nynke
AU - Vermeulen, Hester
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - To identify and compare tools to assess Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) behaviour among healthcare professionals. Systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo and CINAHL up to July 2011. Titles, abstracts and eligible full text articles were screened by two reviewers independently. Relevant data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: original studies among all healthcare professionals that described the development or use of EBP behaviour assessment tools. Of 19 310 identified articles, 172 studies were included. We identified 117 questionnaires, 10 interviews or focus groups, nine observational studies, 27 chart evaluations and nine studies used a combination of methods. Psychometric properties of the questionnaires used were reported in about half of the studies, in seven studies that assess a single EBM step and in six studies that assess a combination of EBM steps. One of these assessed all five steps of EBP. Valid and reliable EBP behaviour assessment tools are available. However, only one questionnaire validly assessed all five EBP steps, covering the entire concept of EBP
AB - To identify and compare tools to assess Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) behaviour among healthcare professionals. Systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo and CINAHL up to July 2011. Titles, abstracts and eligible full text articles were screened by two reviewers independently. Relevant data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: original studies among all healthcare professionals that described the development or use of EBP behaviour assessment tools. Of 19 310 identified articles, 172 studies were included. We identified 117 questionnaires, 10 interviews or focus groups, nine observational studies, 27 chart evaluations and nine studies used a combination of methods. Psychometric properties of the questionnaires used were reported in about half of the studies, in seven studies that assess a single EBM step and in six studies that assess a combination of EBM steps. One of these assessed all five steps of EBP. Valid and reliable EBP behaviour assessment tools are available. However, only one questionnaire validly assessed all five EBP steps, covering the entire concept of EBP
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2012-100969
DO - https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2012-100969
M3 - Article
C2 - 23349216
SN - 1356-5524
VL - 18
SP - 129
EP - 138
JO - Evidence-based medicine
JF - Evidence-based medicine
IS - 4
ER -