Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the use of medical research to determine the best ways to offer patient care. The nurses can study expert opinions, research and other types of data to identify channels of offering optimal care to patients. It integrates the best scientific evidence with the best available practitioner and patient evidence. A systematic process that can be used in EBP includes asking a problem, searching for the most recent research based on the issues, incorporating clinical experience and incorporating the preferences of patients. Finally, the nurse applies the results. It deliberates both external and internal influences on practice as well as boosts critical thinking in the application of evidence to a patient population or individual patients. The critique below focuses on a quantitative research by Campbell et al. (2015) on the content, rigor, and quality of evidence-based practice point-of-care resources.
A study done focuses on the development of a broadly updated list of available evidence-based practice (EBP) point-of-care resources. An evaluation of the policies and processes used in the development of the content is done to offer a critical analysis grounded on measures, general characteristics, volume, breadth, content presentation, transparency and rigor of editorial quality (Campbell et al., 2015). The analysis purposes to inform healthcare providers as well as supporting quality improvement among publishers of the EBP resources. A review of literature has been done to define EBP and studies done on EBP resources.
In the study, Cochrane Central, CINAHL and Pubmed searches were done to identify studies discussing healthcare professional content on resources developed on articles published in English from January 2008 to July 2013. The keywords used in the research included clinical decision support, evidence-based medicine, clinical references, and best practice. The researcher identified 2240 references that could be used in the study. They were then assigned scores between 0 and 15 where 15 represented the highest volume resource while 0 had the least (Campbell et al., 2015). For eligibility of the resources, there were resources disregarded due to various reasons. Guidelines were avoided because they have extensive numbers of previous reviews on guidelines effectiveness while search engines and meta lists as they only offer direction to the data instead of offering the information itself (Banzi et al., 2010). Online books are not often updated hence the rejection while literature surveillance alerting system do not contain own information but rather offer links to other resources. Forty-six references were selected for full-text review based on the abstract and title while 27 full texts contained mention of EBP point of care resources. Twenty-two of the 27 resources met the predefined inclusion criteria, and 20 of them could be accessed after positive reception of a request to access them or as free trials.
A descriptive research method was used in the study. It involved an in-depth study if EBP resources, therefore, the case study form of descriptive research is used. It then narrowed them down to five research objectives to get accurate information from the resources used. There is no cause and effect determination needed in the research method. Two investigators who worked independently through a method consisting of the editorial quality, volume, and breadth, content presentation, general characteristics and evidence-based methodology carried out the evaluation. When disagreements arose, they were solved through discussions or a third investigator invited for consultation. Data recorded for the general characteristic included the marketing claim, type of subscription, target user, open access or fee-based, year of release and the annual cost for a single-user subscription. The content presentation focused on the references, output presentation, education program, clinical tools, patient handout and strength of recommendation formal grading. Editorial quality assessed the accountability, accuracy, and transparency of the resources. Volume and breadth, on the other hand, focused on quantity and diversity of the topics while evidence-based methodology measured the processes that were followed during the development of the resources to ensure they were evidence-based.
The analysis involved assigning the resources scores of 0 to 15 for the five-part system used in the study. After the review of 2240 resources, 562 were chosen for abstract review and 46 of the articles for full-text review. They were then listed based on the five factors, and the evaluation took place between October 2013 and April 2014 (Campbell et al., 2015). The top quartile resources were from Nursing Reference Centre, BMJ best practice, Mosby's Nursing Consult, UpTo date.
Strengths and limitations
The study has a pre-established rubric for describing the EBP resources and scoring. It allowed readers to view previous publication and evaluate how the resources may have improved over time. The literature review done enabled the researchers to identify a wide range of the providers thus enabling healthcare providers in future have to ease when doing research as it outlines the kind of resources available to them. Previous studies have analyzed volume by evaluating the proportion of a random range of diseases based on the targeted resources. However, not all resources targeted for the research were accessible hence; their information could not be incorporated in the study. Additionally, the research is descriptive and statistical comparisons between the resources were not made. The authors have also used a predetermined assessment criterion that has been established by another group.
There are no human beings involved as participants hence issues such as informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, and risk of harm are minimal or none. The ethical issue that can arise the study includes the researchers lacking to cite other authors on the study when writing the literature review. It is wrong to use another author's information and lack to indicate that the idea is from his book or article. Ethical standards are however important in patient care research because they enable the researchers to ensure the illness or health condition a patient may have is kept confidential. The standards also ensure that no person is forced into taking part in a study without volunteering. The participants also need to be guaranteed that the participants, the patients are safe during the research period.
The importance of the study to nursing practitioners involves assisting them to identify the latest trends in the healthcare and more so in the nursing departments. The study, therefore, enables nurses to identify relevant sites for the researches such as Pubmed. They also manage to identify the research cases that are already researched, those that may require further research in the future and the topics yet to be researched. Based on the previous studies done on patient care, the health professionals can use the information in their practices thus making it an evidence-based practice.
Banzi, R., Liberati, A., Moschetti, I., Tagliabue, L., & Moja, L. (2010). A review of online evidence-based practice point-of-care information summary providers. Journal of medical Internet research, 12(3), e26.
Campbell, J. M., Umapathysivam, K., Xue, Y., & Lockwood, C. (2015). Evidence-Based Practice Point-of-Care Resources: A Quantitative Evaluation of Quality, Rigor, and Content. Worldviews on evidence-based Nursing, 12(6), 313-327.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal:
- Course Work Example on Children's Nutrition
- Should One Choose to Get Vaccination or Should the Government Enforce It
- Essay Example on Health Care Reform Act
- Restraint Use Reduction and Instructional Methods
- Smoking in Public
- Medicine Essay Example: A Stroke Symptoms and Treatment
- Case Study Example of a Sepsis/SIRS Patient