BackgroundA commonly recommended strategy for increasing research use in clinical practice is to identify barriers to change and then tailor interventions to overcome the identified barriers. In nursing, the BARRIERS scale has been used extensively to identify barriers to research utilization.Aim and objectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to examine the state of knowledge resulting from use of the BARRIERS scale and to make recommendations about future use of the scale. The following objectives were addressed: To examine how the scale has been modified, to examine its psychometric properties, to determine the main barriers (and whether they varied over time and geographic locations), and to identify associations between nurses' reported barriers and reported research use.MethodsMedline (1991 to September 2009) and CINHAL (1991 to September 2009) were searched for published research, and ProQuest® digital dissertations were searched for unpublished dissertations using the BARRIERS scale. Inclusion criteria were: studies using the BARRIERS scale in its entirety and where the sample was nurses. Two authors independently assessed the study quality and extracted the data. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used.ResultsSixty-three studies were included, with most using a cross-sectional design. Not one study used the scale for tailoring interventions to overcome identified barriers. The main barriers reported were related to the setting, and the presentation of research findings. Overall, identified barriers were consistent over time and across geographic locations, despite varying sample size, response rate, study setting, and assessment of study quality. Few studies reported associations between reported research use and perceptions of barriers to research utilization.ConclusionsThe BARRIERS scale is a nonspecific tool for identifying general barriers to research utilization. The scale is reliable as reflected in assessments of internal consistency. The validity of the scale, however, is doubtful. There is no evidence that it is a useful tool for planning implementation interventions. We recommend that no further descriptive studies using the BARRIERS scale be undertaken. Barriers need to be measured specific to the particular context of implementation and the intended evidence to be implemented.
Objectives
To analyze whether frailty and comorbidities are associated with in-hospital mortality and discharge to home in older adults hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
Design
Single-center observational study.
Setting and Participants
Patients admitted to geriatric care in a large hospital in Sweden between March 1 and June 11, 2020; 250 were treated for COVID-19 and 717 for other diagnoses.
Methods
COVID-19 diagnosis was clinically confirmed by positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test or, if negative, by other methods. Patient data were extracted from electronic medical records, which included Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and were further used for assessments of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). In-hospital mortality and home discharge were followed up for up to 25 and 28 days, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression models adjusted for age and sex were used.
Results
Among the patients with COVID-19, in-hospital mortality rate was 24% and home discharge rate was 44%. Higher age was associated with in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05 per each year, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01‒1.08) and lower probability of home discharge (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95‒0.99). CFS (>5) and CCI, but not HFRS, were predictive of in-hospital mortality (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.02‒3.65 and HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02‒1.58, respectively). Patients with CFS >5 had a lower probability of being discharged home (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25‒0.58). CCI and HFRS were not associated with home discharge. In general, effects were more pronounced in men. Acute kidney injury was associated with in-hospital mortality and hypertension with discharge to home. Other comorbidities (diabetes, cardiovascular disease, lung diseases, chronic kidney disease and dementia) were not associated with either outcome.
Conclusions and Implications
Of all geriatric patients with COVID-19, 3 out of 4 survived during the study period. Our results indicate that in addition to age, the level of frailty is a useful predictor of short-term COVID-19 outcomes in geriatric patients.
Sustainability in QI work was significantly related to supportive leadership, facilitative human resources, increased activity in seeking new research and enhanced implementation of research findings in clinical practice. It appears that these factors constitute a necessary prerequisite for professional development and the establishment of evidence-based practice.
BackgroundEvidence-based practice (EBP) is emphasized to increase the quality of care and patient safety. EBP is often described as a process consisting of distinct activities including, formulating questions, searching for information, compiling the appraised information, implementing evidence, and evaluating the resulting practice. To increase registered nurses’ (RNs’) practice of EBP, variables associated with such activities need to be explored. The aim of the study was to examine individual and organizational factors associated with EBP activities among RNs 2 years post graduation.MethodsA cross-sectional design based on a national sample of RNs was used. Data were collected in 2007 from a cohort of RNs, included in the Swedish Longitudinal Analyses of Nursing Education/Employment study. The sample consisted of 1256 RNs (response rate 76%). Of these 987 RNs worked in healthcare at the time of the data collection. Data was self-reported and collected through annual postal surveys. EBP activities were measured using six single items along with instruments measuring individual and work-related variables. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models.ResultsAssociated factors were identified for all six EBP activities. Capability beliefs regarding EBP was a significant factor for all six activities (OR = 2.6 - 7.3). Working in the care of older people was associated with a high extent of practicing four activities (OR = 1.7 - 2.2). Supportive leadership and high collective efficacy were associated with practicing three activities (OR = 1.4 - 2.0).ConclusionsTo be successful in enhancing EBP among newly graduated RNs, strategies need to incorporate both individually and organizationally directed factors.
Background: One strategy to enhance research use and change current practice is to identify barriers and then implement tailored interventions to reduce these barriers. In nursing, the BARRIERS scale has been frequently used to identify nurses' perceptions of barriers to research utilization. However, this scale has not been applied to care of older people, and only one study has investigated how identified barriers link to research utilization. Therefore, the purpose of this study was twofold: to describe RNs' perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of research utilization and to examine the validity of the BARRIERS scale in relation to research use.
Individual and organizational factors were associated with the use of research in EC. Despite distinguishing conditions in EC settings, identified factors reflect well-known determinants of research use that, as in many other health care contexts, should be considered in the endeavours of evidence-based practice.
There is an urgent need for further research and evidence-based knowledge within most domains in geriatric dentistry and in other fields related to oral health and dental care for older persons striving for multi-disciplinary research programmes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.