IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i13-14p1944-1951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi‐institutional study of barriers to research utilisation and evidence‐based practice among hospital nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline E Brown
  • Laurie Ecoff
  • Son C Kim
  • Mary A Wickline
  • Barbara Rose
  • Kathy Klimpel
  • Dale Glaser

Abstract

Aims. The study aims were to explore the relationships between perceived barriers to research use and the implementation of evidence‐based practice among hospital nurses and to investigate the barriers as predictors of implementation of evidence‐based practice. Background. Evidence‐based practice is critical in improving healthcare quality. Although barriers to research use have been extensively studied, little is known about the relationships between the barriers and the implementation of evidence‐based practice in nursing. Design. Cross‐sectional study. Method. Data were collected between December 2006–January 2007 for this cross‐sectional study using computerised Evidence‐Based Practice Questionnaire and BARRIERS surveys. A convenience sample (n = 1301) of nurses from four hospitals in southern California, USA, participated. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed for each of the three dependent variables: practice, attitude and knowledge/skills associated with evidence‐based practice. BARRIERS subscales were used as predictor variables. Results. The perceived barriers to research use predicted only 2·7, 2·4 and 4·5% of practice, attitude and knowledge/skills associated with evidence‐based practice. Conclusions. It was unexpected that the barriers to research use predicted such small fractions of practice, attitude and knowledge/skills associated with evidence‐based practice. The barriers appear to have minimal influence over the implementation of evidence‐based practice for most hospital nurses. Relevance to clinical practice. In implementing evidence‐based practice, the focus on barriers to research use among general nursing staff may be misplaced. Further studies are needed to identify the predictors of evidence‐based practice and to identify the subset of nurses who are most amenable to adopting evidence‐based practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline E Brown & Laurie Ecoff & Son C Kim & Mary A Wickline & Barbara Rose & Kathy Klimpel & Dale Glaser, 2010. "Multi‐institutional study of barriers to research utilisation and evidence‐based practice among hospital nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(13‐14), pages 1944-1951, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:13-14:p:1944-1951
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03184.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03184.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03184.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Connie Bøttcher Berthelsen & Bibi Hølge‐Hazelton, 2018. "Caught between a rock and a hard place: An intrinsic single case study of nurse researchers’ experiences of the presence of a nursing research culture in clinical practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(7-8), pages 1572-1580, April.
    2. Son Chae Kim & Caroline E. Brown & Laurie Ecoff & Judy E. Davidson & Ana-Maria Gallo & Kathy Klimpel & Mary A. Wickline, 2013. "Regional Evidence-Based Practice Fellowship Program," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 22(1), pages 51-69, February.
    3. Edurne Zabaleta‐del‐Olmo & Mireia Subirana‐Casacuberta & Ana Ara‐Pérez & Bibiana Escuredo‐Rodríguez & María Ángeles Ríos‐Rodríguez & Lourdes Carrés‐Esteve & Glòria Jodar‐Solà & Yolanda Lejardi‐Estevez, 2016. "Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire for community health nurses: reliability and validity of a Spanish adaptation," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3-4), pages 505-517, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:13-14:p:1944-1951. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.