Developing a professional and organisational culture within National Health Service (NHS) trusts that is supportive of improving evidence-based practice will require both the generation and the use of research evidence. This article reports the findings of a study that explored the factors that inhibit and facilitate the use of research evidence by occupational therapists. The sample of 100 occupational therapists was drawn from across seven acute NHS trusts, in one NHS region, including two teaching hospitals. The postal survey achieved a 78% response rate. The findings illustrate that whilst occupational therapists have a positive attitude towards the use of research and are keen to make use of that evidence in practice, workload pressures are a major inhibiting factor. The challenge for practitioners and managers alike is to create organisational conditions that are supportive of the NHS policy objectives to enhance the use of evidence-based practice.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose -Research on sustainability in higher education has focused on environmental management of the university campus, case studies and examples of good practice. Although the value and contribution of these initiatives has been articulated, little holistic and structural transformation of universities has been achieved so far. This paper aims to explore different theoretical frameworks to better understand and improve the effectiveness of organisational change processes towards sustainability in universities. Design/methodology/approach -The combination of different theoretical approaches on organisational learning such as organisational learning theory, the idea of expansive learning at work, the ideal of the learning organisation and transformative learning theory are reviewed in this paper. These ideas in combination with leadership for sustainability and education for sustainability lead to an integrative model that links theory and practice, cultural and social aspects influencing learning, and the ability of individuals to critically reflect and challenge existing worldviews to learn and develop new practices. Findings -The theoretical foundations and model presented seek to provide useful theoretical basis with which to better understand the process of transformation towards sustainability in higher education. This involves a continuous process of learning to rethink existing practices and worldviews by individuals within the organisation, which lead to community learning, which in turn lead to organisational learning. Six key implications for action have also been identified. Originality/value -Little research exists that uses organisational learning to inform the design and development of the research reporting on the achievements, opportunities and challenges emerged during the change process towards embedding sustainability in higher education. The suggested framework is envisaged as an integrative theoretical framework that can help understand the "how to", thus the learning processes associated with embedding sustainability in the core activities of universities.

Since their inception in the mid 1970s, the role of the diabetes nurse specialist (DNS) has become well established. However, their functions have not been clearly defined. This has resulted in the inclusion of a variety of activities in their job descriptions. While some of these are controversial, there is little dispute that a key component of the post is the evaluation, integration and (in some circumstances) the generation of research evidence. The purpose of this study was to explore the participation, attitudes, sources of support, and encouraging and discouraging factors experienced by DNSs in utilising research evidence. An associated study allowed comparison with a sample of non‐nurse specialists. Two hundred and ninety‐nine DNSs (response rate 72%) across seven of the eight regions of the National Health Service in England completed the questionnaire, and 133 nurses responded (response rate of 71 %) in the eighth region. The results suggest that DNSs are positive about utilising research evidence and more likely to be involved in research activities than non nurse specialists. However, unless issues around time and clinical workload are addressed, the potential of the DNS's role in promoting evidence‐based practice is unlikely to be fully realised.

This paper describes the curriculum model developed for an ambitious interprofessional education programme for health and social care professions implemented in two universities in the south of England (the New Generation Project). An outline of how the New Generation Project has interpreted the meaning of interprofessional learning is presented first. This is followed by an outline of the structure of the programme, describing both learning in common and interprofessional learning components. The pedagogies underpinning this curriculum initiative are presented and an integrated pedagogical model, facilitated collaborative interprofessional learning, is proposed. The New Generation Project curriculum is then discussed as an extension of an established typology of interprofessional education.

This article examines intergroup processes amongst neophyte health and social care students who are about to embark on an interprofessional education (IPE) programme. Positive relationships between students of the different professions must be optimized to promote student learning of each other, a central objective of these courses. It has been proposed that to reduce conflict and promote harmonious intergroup relations during this IPE activity, students from each professional group should feel their own group (the ingroup) to be distinctive from other professional groups (the outgroup) on some key characteristics (intergroup differentiation). Good relations are further promoted if the characteristics they see as distinctive to their identities are also recognized as distinctive by other professional groups (mutual intergroup differentiation). The current article considers the incidence of these two factors in neophyte health and social care students and identifies sources of potential intergroup conflict. The findings of the study suggest that all groups of neophyte health and social care students perceived their ingroup as distinct from other professional groups, with the exception of audiology students. The implications of this finding to the relationships between students participating in IPE are discussed. Furthermore, in certain groups there was evidence that students of these groups were seen by others as they saw themselves. This was particularly the case for doctors and social workers and implies that these professions will suffer least from a threat to their group distinctiveness. However, there were instances where characteristics, seen as distinctive by the professional group itself, were not recognized by other groups. For example, physiotherapy students believe that being a team player, and decision making and practical skills were all distinctive characteristics of their profession. However, these features were not recognized as distinctive by other professional groups. The implications of matches/mismatches in how students see themselves, and how they may be viewed by others, are discussed in terms of their impact on student learning experiences and relationships during IPE.

There is a great deal of interest in the United Kingdom in clinical guidelines as a means of assisting practitioner and patient decision making about care options and in improving the quality of the care provided. Confusion remains, however, over what is meant by a clinical guideline and how it differs from and relates to protocols and standards. This paper was written under the auspices of the Royal College of Nursing Steering Group for the college's work on clinical guidelines, with the aim of clarifying some of the terminology used in the field and introducing ways in which clinical guidelines might be used by practitioners and patients to readers. At the moment just how effective the use of clinical guidelines can be on care is poorly established. What is known, however, is that crucial to their success are the strategies and methods used for their implementation. Such strategies and methods raise questions about how a sense of ownership can be engendered in those using the clinical guidelines and how they may be best operationalized. These questions are considered in this paper.