IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i3-4p505-517.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire for community health nurses: reliability and validity of a Spanish adaptation

Author

Listed:
  • 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
  • Núria Nuix‐Baqué
  • Asunción Aguas‐Lluch
  • Àngels Ondiviela‐Cariteu
  • Rafaela Blanco‐Sánchez
  • María Rosa García‐Cerdán
  • Juan Carlos Contel‐Segura
  • Jeroni Jurado‐Campos
  • Dolors Juvinyà‐Canal

Abstract

Aims and objectives This study aimed to translate the community nursing version of the Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire, adapt the Spanish translation to the primary care context in Spain, and evaluate its reliability and validity. Background Instruments available in Spanish to date are not designed to rigorously evaluate barriers and incentives associated with evidence‐based practice implementation in community health nursing. Design Classical Test Theory approach. Methods The 49‐item Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire was translated, back‐translated and pilot‐tested. Two items were added to assess respondents’ ability to read and understand the English language. During the first six months of 2010, 513 nurses from 255 primary health care centres in Catalunya (Spain) voluntarily participated in the study. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability were evaluated. Internal structure was analysed by principal component analysis. A randomized, controlled, parallel‐design study was carried out to test scores’ sensitivity to change with two groups, intervention and control. The intervention consisted of eight hours of in‐person training, provided by experts in evidence‐based practice. Results Of 513 nurses, 445 (86·7%) nurses responded to all 51 items. Factor analysis showed six components that explained 51% of the total variance. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability were satisfactory (Cronbach α and intraclass correlation coefficients >0·70). A total of 93 nurses participated in the sensitivity‐to‐change tests (42 in the intervention group, 51 controls). After the training session, overall score and the ‘skills for evidence‐based practice’ component score showed a medium (Cohen d = 0·69) and large effect (Cohen d = 0·86), respectively. Conclusions The Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire adapted to community health nursing in the primary care setting in Spain has satisfactory psychometric properties. Relevance to clinical practice The Developing Evidence‐Based Practice questionnaire is a useful tool for planning and evaluating the implementation of evidence‐based practice in community health nursing.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:3-4:p:505-517
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13078
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13078
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13078?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. 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.

    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:25:y:2016:i:3-4:p:505-517. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.