在实践中使用证据:卫生专业人员真正做什么?

Joyce L. Marshall , Mary J. Renfrew , Mary Godfrey
{"title":"在实践中使用证据:卫生专业人员真正做什么?","authors":"Joyce L. Marshall ,&nbsp;Mary J. Renfrew ,&nbsp;Mary Godfrey","doi":"10.1016/j.cein.2006.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To examine the use of knowledge, and in particular, of evidence derived from research, in interactions between community midwives or health visitors and their clients around the topic of breastfeeding.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A qualitative study involving observation of practice (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->158) and in-depth interviews with women (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>22), midwives (</span><em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->9) and health visitors (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->9). This paper draws primarily on interviews with health professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Inner city, suburban and rural areas of a northern city in England.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A range of different sources of knowledge were used, including: clinical experience; training courses; reading journals; research, policies and guidelines; watching or speaking to colleagues; and personal experience. Practitioners considered each woman’s individual circumstances, drew on their knowledge of what had worked with other women and used knowledge from formal and informal sources, in an ongoing process of feedback. This accumulation of previous experiences acted as a reference point to test out new information including research findings. The process of building knowledge over time from different sources, formal and informal, seemed to lead to practices that generally concurred with current research evidence. The potential strengths and weaknesses of this approach are discussed, and implications for practice and research are described.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":87580,"journal":{"name":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","volume":"9 ","pages":"Pages e181-e190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.10.003","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using evidence in practice: What do health professionals really do?\",\"authors\":\"Joyce L. Marshall ,&nbsp;Mary J. Renfrew ,&nbsp;Mary Godfrey\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cein.2006.10.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To examine the use of knowledge, and in particular, of evidence derived from research, in interactions between community midwives or health visitors and their clients around the topic of breastfeeding.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A qualitative study involving observation of practice (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->158) and in-depth interviews with women (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>22), midwives (</span><em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->9) and health visitors (<em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->9). This paper draws primarily on interviews with health professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Inner city, suburban and rural areas of a northern city in England.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>A range of different sources of knowledge were used, including: clinical experience; training courses; reading journals; research, policies and guidelines; watching or speaking to colleagues; and personal experience. Practitioners considered each woman’s individual circumstances, drew on their knowledge of what had worked with other women and used knowledge from formal and informal sources, in an ongoing process of feedback. This accumulation of previous experiences acted as a reference point to test out new information including research findings. The process of building knowledge over time from different sources, formal and informal, seemed to lead to practices that generally concurred with current research evidence. The potential strengths and weaknesses of this approach are discussed, and implications for practice and research are described.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"Pages e181-e190\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cein.2006.10.003\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical effectiveness in nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000586\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical effectiveness in nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361900406000586","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

目的探讨在社区助产士或卫生巡视员与其客户之间围绕母乳喂养主题的互动中知识的使用情况,特别是研究证据的使用情况。设计一项定性研究,包括对实践的观察(n = 158)和对妇女(n = 22)、助产士(n = 9)和卫生巡视员(n = 9)的深入访谈。本文主要利用对卫生专业人员的访谈。英国北部城市的内城、郊区和农村地区。使用了一系列不同的知识来源,包括:临床经验;培训课程;阅读期刊;研究、政策及指引;注视或与同事交谈;还有个人经历。在不断反馈的过程中,从业人员考虑到每个妇女的个人情况,利用她们对其他妇女的工作经验的了解,并利用来自正式和非正式来源的知识。以往经验的积累作为检验新信息(包括研究结果)的参考点。随着时间的推移,从正式和非正式的不同来源积累知识的过程,似乎导致了与当前研究证据普遍一致的实践。讨论了这种方法的潜在优势和弱点,并描述了对实践和研究的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using evidence in practice: What do health professionals really do?

Objectives

To examine the use of knowledge, and in particular, of evidence derived from research, in interactions between community midwives or health visitors and their clients around the topic of breastfeeding.

Design

A qualitative study involving observation of practice (n = 158) and in-depth interviews with women (n = 22), midwives (n = 9) and health visitors (n = 9). This paper draws primarily on interviews with health professionals.

Setting

Inner city, suburban and rural areas of a northern city in England.

Findings

A range of different sources of knowledge were used, including: clinical experience; training courses; reading journals; research, policies and guidelines; watching or speaking to colleagues; and personal experience. Practitioners considered each woman’s individual circumstances, drew on their knowledge of what had worked with other women and used knowledge from formal and informal sources, in an ongoing process of feedback. This accumulation of previous experiences acted as a reference point to test out new information including research findings. The process of building knowledge over time from different sources, formal and informal, seemed to lead to practices that generally concurred with current research evidence. The potential strengths and weaknesses of this approach are discussed, and implications for practice and research are described.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Maternal psychosocial predictors of pediatric health care use: Use of the common sense model of health and illness behaviors to extend beyond the usual suspects Does excessive alcohol use in teenagers affect their everyday prospective memory? What is it like to use hip protectors? A qualitative study of the views and experiences of nurses and patients Evaluation of the nature of untoward clinical events in adult high dependency care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1