Dataset Information

Core Evidence-Based Practice Competencies and Learning Outcomes for European Nurses: Consensus Statements.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Consensus on evidence-based practice (EBP) competencies and associated learning outcomes for registered nurses has not yet been achieved in the European context.

Aims

To establish a set of core EBP competencies for nurses and the most important EBP learning outcomes encompassing attitudes, knowledge, and skills dimensions for implementation into nursing education in European countries.

Methods

A multi-phase modified Delphi survey was conducted: Phase 1, a literature review; Phase 2, a two-round consensus of experts; and Phase 3, a Delphi survey. Experts from six European countries participated.

Results

In Phase 1, 88 records were selected and 835 statements extracted, which were grouped according to the seven steps of EBP. After removing 157 duplicates, the remaining competencies (n = 678) were evaluated in Phase 2. Then, a two-round expert consensus was reached, with 24 competencies and 120 learning outcomes identified and divided into affective, cognitive, and skills domains. In Phase 3, based on a Delphi survey expert consensus, all evaluated statements were included in a final set of competencies and learning outcomes. Only two learning outcomes were recommended for allocation to a different domain, and four were reformulated as suggested, with no further changes to the others.

Linking evidence to action

The set of EBP competencies and learning outcomes can guide nurse educators, managers, and EBP stakeholders in the development of content that incorporates EBP knowledge, skills, and attitudes into educational programs. Prioritizing the EBP competencies and learning outcomes that are most necessary and adapting them to every context will provide healthcare organizations with guidelines for enhancing the continuing education of nurses. These results could facilitate the development of effective tools for assessing nursing students' and nurses' perception of competencies required for EBP processes.

SUBMITTER: Dolezel J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8251814 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFew training opportunities are available for implementation practitioners; we designed the Practicing Knowledge Translation (PKT) to address this gap. The goal of PKT is to train practitioners to use evidence and apply implementation science in healthcare settings. The aim of this study was to describe PKT and evaluate participant use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs), knowledge, self-efficacy, and satisfaction and feedback on the course.MethodsPKT was delivered to implementation practitioners between September 2015 and February 2016 through a 3-day workshop, 11 webinars. We assessed PKT using an uncontrolled before and after study design, using convergent parallel mixed methods. The primary outcome was use of TMFs in implementation projects. Secondary outcomes were knowledge and self-efficacy across six core competencies, factors related to each of the outcomes, and satisfaction with the course. Participants completed online surveys and semi-structured interviews at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months.ResultsParticipants (n = 15) reported an increase in their use of implementation TMFs (mean = 2.11; estimate = 2.11; standard error (SE) = 0.4; p = 0.03). There was a significant increase in participants' knowledge of developing an evidence-informed, theory-driven program (ETP) (estimate = 4.10; SE = 0.37; p = 0.002); evidence implementation (estimate = 2.68; SE = 0.42; p < 0.001); evaluation (estimate = 4.43; SE = 0.36; p < 0.001); sustainability, scale, and spread (estimate = 2.55; SE = 0.34; p < 0.001); and context assessment (estimate = 3.86; SE = 0.32; p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in participants' self-efficacy in developing an ETP (estimate = 3.81; SE = 0.34; p < 0.001); implementation (estimate = 3.01; SE = 0.36; p < 0.001); evaluation (estimate = 3.83; SE = 0.39; p = 0.002); sustainability, scale, and spread (estimate = 3.06; SE = 0.46; p = 0.003); and context assessment (estimate = 4.05; SE = 0.38; p = 0.016).ConclusionProcess and outcome measures collected indicated that PKT participants increased use of, knowledge of, self-efficacy in KT. Our findings highlight the importance of longitudinal evaluations of training initiatives to inform how to build capacity for implementers.

Project description:ObjectivesDespite the publication of hundreds of trials on gout and hyperuricemia, management of these conditions remains suboptimal. We aimed to assess the quality and consistency of guidance documents for gout and hyperuricemia.DesignSystematic review and quality assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) II methodology.Data sourcesPubMed and EMBASE (27 October 2016), two Chinese academic databases, eight guideline databases, and Google and Google scholar (July 2017).Eligibility criteriaWe included the latest version of international and national/regional clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements for diagnosis and/or treatment of hyperuricemia and gout, published in English or Chinese.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently screened searched items and extracted data. Four reviewers independently scored documents using AGREE II. Recommendations from all documents were tabulated and visualised in a coloured grid.ResultsTwenty-four guidance documents (16 clinical practice guidelines and 8 consensus statements) published between 2003 and 2017 were included. Included documents performed well in the domains of scope and purpose (median 85.4%, range 66.7%-100.0%) and clarity of presentation (median 79.2%, range 48.6%-98.6%), but unsatisfactory in applicability (median 10.9%, range 0.0%-66.7%) and editorial independence (median 28.1%, range 0.0%-83.3%). The 2017 British Society of Rheumatology guideline received the highest scores. Recommendations were concordant on the target serum uric acid level for long-term control, on some indications for urate-lowering therapy (ULT), and on the first-line drugs for ULT and for acute attack. Substantially inconsistent recommendations were provided for many items, especially for the timing of initiation of ULT and for treatment for asymptomatic hyperuricemia.ConclusionsMethodological quality needs improvement in guidance documents on gout and hyperuricemia. Evidence for certain clinical questions is lacking, despite numerous trials in this field. Promoting standard guidance development methods and synthesising high-quality clinical evidence are potential approaches to reduce recommendation inconsistencies.Prospero registration numberCRD42016046104.