A Feeling of Ambiguity: A Qualitative Content Analysis of Managers' Experiences of Evidence-Based Practice in Swedish Primary Care

Exploring expectations and readiness for healthy lifestyle promotion in Swedish primary health care: a qualitative analysis of managers, facilitators, and professionals

OBJECTIVE

Prior to a multifaceted implementation strategy for a healthy lifestyle-promoting practice the expectations of primary health care managers, appointed internal facilitators and health care professionals on supporting change was explored.

DESIGN

This study had an explorative qualitative design using data gathered from individual interviews and focus groups. Qualitative content analysis with a deductive category development was applied using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study was conducted in a primary care setting in central Sweden as a part of the Act in Time research project. Prior to a multifaceted implementation strategy, we held 16 individual interviews with managers and appointed facilitators and five focus groups with 26 health care professionals.

RESULTS

Managers, facilitators, and professionals held similar expectations, where their expressed need for support corresponded to three constructs: Readiness for implementation, Implementation climate, and Engaging. Our findings indicate the need for strong leadership engagement to focus on how the healthy lifestyle-promoting practice can be anchored among the professionals. Managers at all levels should communicate the vision and goals, enable facilitators and professionals to improve their competencies, build inter-professional teams, and jointly plan the new practice.

CONCLUSION

To change to a healthy lifestyle promoting practice professionals request support from their managers, who in turn need support from the middle and top managers. The requested support includes helping to prioritise health promotion and enabling the primary care centres to build competence and take ownership of the implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04799860.

Role of Magnet®-recognized hospital nurse managers in implementing evidence-based practice: A mixed-method study

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems recognize evidence-based practice (EBP) as the prestigious standard for providing safe and high-quality patient care, nursing excellence, and Magnet Recognition. Despite the well-documented benefits, implementation of EBP is inconsistent and remains elusive in the US and throughout the world and many patients still fail to receive evidence-based care. The literature revealed a huge gap between nursing science and practice but provided evidence that nurse managers (NMs) had a pivotal leadership role in implementing EBP.

AIM

To gain a deeper understanding of Magnet-recognized hospital nurse managers' (MRHNMs) leadership roles, the influencing factors, and their experience in implementing EBP to enhance EBP initiatives and sustain Magnet recognition.

METHOD

This mixed-method study guided by Goodall's (Australasian Psychiatry, 2016. 24, 231) theory of expert leadership used a sequential explanatory method with a quantitative-driven design based on a national correlational survey augmented by a qualitative descriptive component using semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

The findings of the study demonstrated that MRHNMs had a 54.6% effective leadership role in implementing EBP and produced numerous themes indicating that MRHNMs did implement EBP with struggle. MRHNMs in this study viewed EBP as a healthcare priority and leadership of NMs is necessary to promote EBP. However, lack of knowledge, difficulties with the EBP process, time constraints, and staffing issues negatively impacted EBP. Postgraduate degree, formal EBP education, critical care units as workplace, collaboration with doctorally prepared nurses, and Magnet culture enhanced EBP among MRHNMs.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

EBP is essential for Magnet recognition and is a hallmark of nursing excellence, however, is a complex and challenging process. The leadership of NMs is necessary to shape evidence-based care, and NMs require EBP preparation during leadership training, necessary resources, and time to complete the EBP process. EBP cannot become a reality without leaders being engaged, supportive, and persistent.

The dilemma of the split between theory and reality as experienced by primary healthcare professionals: a mixed methods study of evidence-based practice in a primary care context

BACKGROUND

Primary care depends upon a good information flow across professional and structural boundaries to provide the best care for patients. Previous research has mainly focused on Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) within specific professions. Mapping of pan-professional experiences of and attitudes to EBP in publicly funded clinical practice is necessary to deepen the understanding of EBP and its implementation. Thus, this study aimed to investigate healthcare professionals' experiences of and attitudes towards working in accordance with EBP in primary care.

METHODS

The study used a convergent mixed methods design divided into two strands: a quantitative enquiry tool (Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale, EBPAS) and a set of qualitative interviews analysed by means of qualitative content analysis. Both strands included all primary care employees with patient interaction in the studied county (n = 625), including doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, psychologists and assistant nurses. Out of the original 625 healthcare professionals, 191 finished the first strand and 8 volunteered for the second strand (2 nurses, 2 physiotherapists, 1 psychiatrist and 3 doctors).

RESULTS

The EBPAS value of 2.8 (max 4) indicated a generally positive attitude towards EBP amongst the population, which was also evident in the interviews. However, there were additional experiences of not having the ability or resources to engage in EBP. This was illustrated by the theme that emerged from the qualitative content analysis: "The dilemma of the split between theory and reality". Due to the organisational and managerial focus on efficiency rather than quality of care, there were few or no incentives for promoting individual educational or research development.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the general attitude towards EBP is positive, experiences of practising it differ. There is a need to increase knowledge of EBP concepts, requirements and implementation in the clinical setting. The absence of opportunities to do research and collegial debate about new ways of finding and implementing research-based evidence results might influence the quality of care.