A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this systematic review was to identify which information is included when reporting educational interventions used to facilitate foundational skills and knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP) training for health professionals. This systematic review comprised the first stage in the three stage development process for a reporting guideline for educational interventions for EBP.MethodsThe review question was ‘What information has been reported when describing educational interventions targeting foundational evidence-based practice knowledge and skills?’MEDLINE, Academic Search Premier, ERIC, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Informit health, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until October - December 2011. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials reporting original data on educational interventions specific to developing foundational knowledge and skills of evidence-based practice were included.Studies were not appraised for methodological bias, however, reporting frequency and item commonality were compared between a random selection of studies included in the systematic review and a random selection of studies excluded as they were not controlled trials. Twenty-five data items were extracted by two independent reviewers (consistency > 90%).ResultsSixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 29 randomised, n = 32 non-randomised). The most consistently reported items were the learner’s stage of training, professional discipline and the evaluation methods used (100%). The least consistently reported items were the instructor(s) previous teaching experience (n = 8, 13%), and student effort outside face to face contact (n = 1, 2%).ConclusionThis systematic review demonstrates inconsistencies in describing educational interventions for EBP in randomised and non-randomised trials. To enable educational interventions to be replicable and comparable, improvements in the reporting for educational interventions for EBP are required. In the absence of a specific reporting guideline, there are a range of items which are reported with variable frequency. Identifying the important items for describing educational interventions for facilitating foundational knowledge and skills in EBP remains to be determined. The findings of this systematic review will be used to inform the next stage in the development of a reporting guideline for educational interventions for EBP.

A systematic review of the outcomes of educational interventions relevant to nurses with simultaneous strategies for guideline implementation

“…() and Phillips et al . () stated that research evidence on the effectiveness of continuing medical education on evidence‐based practice (EBP) did not provide a strong basis for choosing intervention strategies to fit a given context. The implementation of EBN was a complicated process and it was important to support several simultaneously occurring factors related to nursing staff, leadership practices, organisational culture and the availability and applicability of evidence and the infrastructure supporting its usage (Matthew‐Maich et al .…”

“…Teachers were only mentioned in one of the studies (Lucas & Knobel ) and this was also one of the most poorly described items in Phillips et al . 's () systematic review. The most consistently reported items were information on participants' professional fields, their working environments, the number of teaching sessions, the duration of the programme and the evaluation method that was used.…”

Development and validation of the guideline for reporting evidence-based practice educational interventions and teaching (GREET)

“…1) [20]. To ensure all 25 items identified in the systematic review were included in the next stage of the development process (the four round Delphi survey), cross checking of these 25 items was completed at the end of the second round of the Delphi survey [21].…”

A systematic review of factors influencing knowledge management and the nurse leaders’ role

“…There is still little evidence on the effectiveness of interventions promoting evidence‐based practice, and interventions have not been sufficiently thoroughly reported to enable their repeatability and comparability (Phillips et al . ). There is also little research available on the significance of organisational infrastructures for the facilitation of evidence‐based practice (Flodgren et al .…”