Use of research by the Australian health promotion workforce

James, Erica; Fraser, Caitlin; Anderson, Karen; Judd, Fiona

doi:10.1093/her/cyl111

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(67 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pattern described by these practitioners is consistent with broad trends in the health promotion literature suggesting a shifting trend from evidence-based to evidence-informed practice (Bowen and Zwi, 2005;Armstrong and Murphy, 2012;Meagher-Stewart et al, 2012), an identified need for more appropriate and locally relevant health promotion evidence (Macdonald et al, 1996;McQueen, 2001;James et al, 2007;Biggs and Stickney, 2011), a need for greater recognition of complexity in population health (e.g. Campbell et al, 2000;McQueen, 2001;Gibbon et al, 2002;Aro et al, 2008;Craig et al, 2008;Hawe et al, 2009) and a greater focus on community participation and benefit in health promotion research (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Integrating relationship- and research-based approaches in Australian health promotion practice

Klinner

Carter

Rychetnik

et al. 2014

Health Promotion International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the perspectives of health promotion practitioners on their approaches to determining health promotion practice, in particular on the role of research and relationships in this process. Using Grounded Theory methods, we analysed 58 semi-structured interviews with 54 health promotion practitioners in New South Wales, Australia. Practitioners differentiated between relationship-based and research-based approaches as two sources of knowledge to guide health promotion practice. We identify several tensions in seeking to combine these approaches in practice and describe the strategies that participants adopted to manage these tensions. The strategies included working in an evidence-informed rather than evidence-based way, creating new evidence about relationship-based processes and outcomes, adopting 'relationship-based' research and evaluation methods, making research and evaluation useful for communities, building research and evaluation skills and improving collaboration between research and evaluation and programme implementation staff. We conclude by highlighting three systemic factors which could further support the integration of research-based and relationship-based health promotion practices: (i) expanding conceptions of health promotion evidence, (ii) developing 'relationship-based' research methods that enable practitioners to measure complex social processes and outcomes and to facilitate community participation and benefit, and (iii) developing organizational capacity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Integrating relationship- and research-based approaches in Australian health promotion practice

Klinner

Carter

Rychetnik

et al. 2014

Health Promotion International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[4][5][6][7] The importance of evidence-based practice is widely recognised in general medicine and in allied health, including eye care. 8 Despite an increasing awareness of the need for high-quality evidence as a basis for clinical decision-making, recent research indicates that in general medicine, 9,10 and at least in some areas of eye care, 11,12 research findings are not widely incorporated in clinical protocols.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the evidence base used by optometrists in Australia and New Zealand

Suttle

Jalbert

Alnahedh

2012

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The optometrist's role in primary eye care is expanding to include not only diagnosis but also management and co-management of a range of eye diseases and visual disorders. This role calls for evidence-based practice, including an ability to source and reliably assess the various forms of evidence, on which eye care might be based. It is not known whether optometrists registered to practise in Australasia use high or low quality evidence as a basis for their clinical decisions. Methods: The present study addressed this question by surveying 3,589 optometrists registered to practise in Australia and New Zealand. A 16-item questionnaire was made available for completion online. Results: Responses from the 279 optometrists who completed the questionnaire (response rate 7.8 per cent) indicate that, after the patient's history, symptoms and signs, optometrists in our sample place most weight on knowledge and information gained via undergraduate and postgraduate education, including continuing education, as a basis for clinical decision-making. Conclusion: These findings highlight the need for current, critically evaluated content in optometric education and suggest that optometrists currently prefer to receive information and knowledge from an educator rather than sourcing and assessing the material independently. Submitted: 7 February 2011Revised: 28 June 2011 Accepted for publication: 7 July 2011 Key words: clinical decision-making, education, evidence-based medicine, optometry, professional guidelinesOptometrists are primary eye-care providers for a large proportion of the population in Australia and elsewhere. 1 The role of the optometrist includes the prescription of a range of therapeutic drugs for ocular diseases and together with ophthalmologists optometrists share the responsibility for the management of glaucoma (at least in Australia) and other conditions. Optometrists have also taken responsibility for several other areas of eye care such as orthokeratology 2 and aspects of behavioural optometry. 3 This expanding role makes the importance of a sound basis for clinical decision-making even more apparent than it always has been, as reflected by discussions on the need for an evidencebased approach to optometry. [4][5][6][7] The importance of evidence-based practice is widely recognised in general medicine and in allied health, including eye care. 8 Despite an increasing awareness of the need for high-quality evidence as a basis for clinical decision-making, recent research indicates that in general medicine, 9,10 and at least in some areas of eye care, 11,12 research findings are not widely incorporated in clinical protocols.While the optometric profession expands its scope and assumes increasing responsibility in primary eye care for most of the population, it is important to ask about the basis of clinical decisions. The aim of the present study was to address this question by investigating the forms of evidence that are used by optometrists in METHODSA 16-item questionnaire was drafted. The d...

show abstract

“…Large randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are expensive and by way of justifying the expense it is important to survey the clinical practice of affected physicians to determine whether their management of patients takes into account new findings relating to clinical efficacy or cost-effectiveness 1. Several studies in Australia have recently shown that EBM is not well translated into everyday practice in clinical or health promotional settings 2,3…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of acute optic neuritis: A survey of neurologists and ophthalmologists in Australia and New Zealand

Lueck

Danesh‐Meyer

Margrie

et al. 2008

Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies suggest that evidence-based medicine is not well translated into everyday practice. Studies of optic neuritis (ON) have generated clear treatment guidelines. Therefore, a survey was mailed to all Australian and New Zealand neurologists and ophthalmologists to evaluate the impact of recent studies on clinical practice. The response rate was 38.9%. Neurologists were more likely to use high dose corticosteroids and disease modifying agents (DMAs), and were more likely to be aware of relevant literature concerning DMAs. Both groups contained a significant minority of practitioners who would use corticosteroids for reasons not substantiated by available evidence. We conclude that most practitioners manage optic neuritis according to existing evidence and guidelines, but many do not. It is essential to instigate high-quality training programs to keep practitioners up-to-date, thereby optimising patient care and justifying the time and expense of large-scale clinical trials. KeywordsEvidence based medicine; Optic neuritis; Questionnaire survey; Treatment BackgroundThe assumption behind the current drive towards evidence-based medicine (EBM) is that what evidence there is in the literature should ultimately be translated into clinical practice to optimise patient care. Large randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are expensive and by way of justifying the expense it is important to survey the clinical practice of affected physicians to determine whether their management of patients takes into account new findings relating to clinical efficacy or cost-effectiveness. 1 They have also provided strong evidence for and against many of the possible management options for this condition.On the basis of these trials, treatment guidelines regarding the use of corticosteroids have been published by the American Academy of Neurology, 11 and numerous reviews have discussed the optimal management of patients with isolated acute optic neuritis in both the ophthalmology and neurology literature. 4 The aim of this study was to evaluate the current practice patterns of Australian and New Zealand neurologists and ophthalmologists in the management of acute ON with a view to assessing the impact of recent RCTs on clinical practice. MethodsA four-page survey consisting of 23 questions (Appendix 1) was mailed to all Australian and New Zealand neurologists and ophthalmologists registered with the Australian and New Zealand Association of Neurologists (ANZAN) or the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists (RANZCO) in October 2006. The survey included questions related to demographics, the frequency with which patients with acute ON were encountered, practices regarding acute and long-term treatment of ON, the ordering of MRI scans, and the impact of several recent RCTs on patient management. Two follow-up mailings were sent to non-respondents four and eight weeks after the original mailing on the grounds that this was the most efficient way to improve response rate. 12 The study was approved by the ACT ...

show abstract

Use of research by the Australian health promotion workforce

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

Integrating relationship- and research-based approaches in Australian health promotion practice

Integrating relationship- and research-based approaches in Australian health promotion practice

Examining the evidence base used by optometrists in Australia and New Zealand

Management of acute optic neuritis: A survey of neurologists and ophthalmologists in Australia and New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About