Barriers in implementing research among registered nurses working in the care of the elderly: a multicenter study in Spain

Construct validity and reliability of the BARRIERS scale in the Spanish context

OBJECTIVE

To establish the construct validity of the Spanish version of the BARRIERS scale.

METHOD

Methodological study of validation of a measurement instrument based on data from previously published studies. The study population consisted of nurses from the Basque Health Service and the Canary Health Service. The following variables were extracted and unified: Years of professional experience, possession of a specialist nursing degree, possession of a doctorate, type of activity performed by the professional and field of work. For construct validation, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed based on the initial model proposed for the scale and RASCH analysis. A polychoric correlation matrix, factor extraction by unweighted least squares and PROMIN oblique rotation were used. For the RASCH analysis, the Joint Maximun Likelihood estimation (JMLE) method was used; the fit of the items and persons were estimated by means of outfit - Unweighted Mean Square fit statistic (UMS) and infit -Weighted Mean Square Fit Statistic (WMS), as well as the reliability and separation of items and persons.

RESULTS

A total of 1200 nurses and midwives made up the final validation sample (n = 1200), with a mean professional experience of 21.22 ± 9.26 years. The CFA presented a good fit to the data (KMO = 0.935 [95% CI: 0.921-0.945]), changing the factorial assignment in 6 items, while 5 items received factorial scores in more than one factor. The fit values for the 4-factor solution were RMSEA = 0.026 [95% CI: 0.026-0.027] and GFI = 0.991 [95% CI: 0.986-0.991]. In the RASCH analysis most items presented infit-WMS and outfit-UMS values with a good fit.

CONCLUSIONS

The Spanish version of the BARRIERS scale has adequate construct validity although there are changes in the assignment of items to the dimensions compared to the original model. The RASCH analysis indicates adequate fit for both persons and items.

Exploring Professional Practice Environments and Organisational Context Factors Affecting Nurses' Adoption of Evidence-Based Practice: A Scoping Review

This scoping review, conducted within the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework, analysed the recent literature (January 2018 to March 2023) addressing factors inherent to professional practice environments and organisational contexts influencing nurses' adoption of evidence-based practice (EBP). This review included studies involving nurses regardless of sector, practice setting, and scope of practice. A systematic search was undertaken across the PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and MEDLINE databases, as well as the EThOS, OATD, and RCAAP platforms. The extracted textual elements underwent a content analysis, resulting in a coding structure established through an inductive approach that categorised information into main categories and subcategories linked by similarity and thematic affinity. Forty-one studies were included, revealing four main categories of factors impacting EBP adoption by nurses: (1) organisational dynamics, (2) management and leadership, (3) teamwork and communication, and (4) resources and infrastructure. The study's limitations acknowledge the subjective nature of categorisation, recognising potential variations based on individual perspectives despite adopting procedures to minimise the risk of bias. The results provide a substantial foundation for developing interventions to cultivate environments conducive to EBP adoption by nurses, thereby enhancing the integration of evidence into nurses' professional practice contexts. This review was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework (registration no. osf.io/e86qz).

Attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers in research of nurses of the Canary Health Service

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the attitudes, capacities and perceived barriers associated with research among nurses and midwives of the Canary Health Service (SCS).

METHODS

Descriptive observational cross-sectional study with an analytical component carried out in the different SCS departments by means of an online survey in which sociodemographic and specific variables, the Spanish version of the Attitudes towards Research and Development within Nursing Questionnaire (ATRDNQ-e) instrument and the BARRIERS scale were collected. Authorisation was obtained from the two provincial ethics committees. A descriptive and inferential analysis (Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test, post hoc contrast by Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligne test) was performed with JAMOVI® v.2.3.24 software.

RESULTS

A total of 512 nurses and midwives with a mean age of 41.82 years participated in the study. Regarding the scores with the ATRDNQ-e instrument, the dimension with the lowest score was «Language of research» (mean = 3.55/SD = 0.84) and the highest «Assessment of nursing research and development of the nursing discipline» (mean = 4.54/SD = 0.52). The total mean score with the BARRIERS scale was 54.33 (SD = 16.52), with «Organizational characteristics» being the highest scoring subscale (mean = 17.25/SD = 5.90). The two highest perceived barriers were «Not enough time at work to implement new ideas» (mean = 2.55/SD = 1.11) and «Nursing does not have time to read research» (mean = 2.46/ SD = 1.11).

CONCLUSIONS

SCS nurses have a positive attitude towards research, although there are some barriers where improvement actions for nursing research should be implemented.

Barriers to Research Utilization in Nursing: A Systematic Review (2002–2021)

Introduction

There is an existing gap between what people learned from theory and what they clinically practiced, as revealed in research studies in nursing. This gap is primarily due to identified barriers in utilizing the research findings in actual nursing practice.

Objective

To present a scientific mapping of the Scopus-indexed literature published from 2002 to 2021, which studied barriers to research utilization in nursing using the BARRIER scale.

Methods

This systematic review utilized bibliometric analysis. One hundred seventy-nine extracted literature from Scopus was manually reviewed, and the study included 53 documents for further analysis.

Results

Remarkably, almost three-fourths of the documents identified setting-related factors as the most common barrier to research utilization in nursing (n = 39, 73.58%). This is followed by presentation-related factors (n = 16.98%) and nurse-related factors (n = 5, 9.43%), respectively. Findings revealed that insufficient time at work in implementing new ideas was perceived as the top barrier in research utilization in nursing.

Conclusion

It is crucial to determine the hindrances to the utilization of research findings. The results of this study establish the connection between research and evidence-based practice which stimulates in meeting the gap in the current nursing practice. Future studies must include research utilization studies that apply tools other than the BARRIER scale.

Beliefs and implementation of evidence-based practice among nurses in the nursing homes of a Swiss canton: An observational cross-sectional study

Aims and objectives

Examine beliefs about EBP and its level of implementation among nurses working in nursing homes in a bilingual canton of Switzerland and explore associations between these aspects and nurses’ sociodemographic and professional characteristics.

Background

Although evidence‐based practice (EBP) is recognised as an effective strategy for improving the quality and safety of care, little is known about its use in nursing homes. Nurses’ beliefs about EBP and their implementation of it in Switzerland’s nursing homes have never been explored.

Design

An observational cross‐sectional study.

Methods

Beliefs about and implementation of EBP were evaluated using validated French‐ and German‐language versions of the EBP Beliefs Scale and the EBP Implementation Scale, developed by Melnyk and Fineout‐Overholt (Melnyk, Fineout‐Overholt, & Mays, 2008, Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 5, 208). The STROBE checklist for cross‐sectional studies was used in reporting this study.

Results

The participation rate was 40.6% (N = 194). Most participants stated that they had some knowledge of EBP and held favourable beliefs about it. Nevertheless, 37.1% of participants found the concept complicated and 36.1% found it time‐consuming. Participants were more likely to implement stages in the EBP process linked to direct clinical practice rather than those which required scientific knowledge and skills.

Conclusion

Most participants had favourable beliefs about EBP, but the level of implementation of EBP among nurses in their daily clinical practice was sub‐optimal.

Relevance to clinical practice

A greater emphasis should be put on fostering the use of EBP among nurses working in nursing homes. This could be achieved via training and the development of individual, institutional and contextual strategies promoting the integration of EBP in clinical settings.

Identifying international barriers and facilitators to research utilization

PURPOSE

To define research utilization (RU) and identify barriers and facilitators to RU in nursing practice.

METHODS

An international integrative review of 42 studies was conducted related to barriers and facilitators of RU.

RESULTS

Following a review of the research that met the inclusion criteria, the author identifies common themes related to the implementation of research into clinical practice and the challenges surrounding RU.

CONCLUSION

Despite consistently perceived barriers to research among nurses from different geographic, cultural, and clinical backgrounds, practice changes are typically out of their hands. Further research is necessary to gauge perception among the nursing associations, regulatory bodies, healthcare organizations, policy makers, and managers responsible for implementing these changes.

Clinical Nurse Specialist Roles in Conducting Research: Changes Over 3 Years

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to describe clinical nurse specialists' characteristics, interest, confidence, motivators, and barriers in conducting research.

DESIGN

This study was a descriptive, multicohort design.

METHODS

Clinical nurse specialists were recruited electronically through national and local organizations to complete anonymous surveys 3 times, over 3 years. Comparative analyses included χ and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

RESULTS

Of 2052 responders (initial, n = 629; 18 months, n = 465; and 3 years, n = 958), mean (SD) participant age was 50.3 (9.3) years. Overall, 41.7% of participants were involved as principal or coinvestigators in research. Interest in conducting nursing research (on a 0-100 scale) was 61.1 (38.4) and was lowest among the 18-month time point participant group (score, 39.1 [32.2]) and highest at the 3-year time point (68.3, [30.7]; P < .001). Confidence in conducting research, discussion of statistics, and perceptions of motivators and barriers to conducting research did not differ across time period groups. Access to literature and mentors and research knowledge were the most prevalent barriers to conducting research.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than 42% of clinical nurse specialists conducted research and the rate did not change between different time groups. Access and knowledge barriers to conducting research were prominent. Workplace leaders need to consider resources and support of academic educational opportunities to increase research conduct by clinical nurse specialists.