Psychometric properties of the research competencies assessment instrument for nurses (RCAIN) in Greece

Background and Purpose

Evidence-based practice can improve quality of care and patient and system outcomes. Healthcare professionals need certain research competencies to achieve evidence-based practice. We aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the self-reported 19-item Research Competencies Assessment Instrument for Nurses (RCAIN) with Greek.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included in total, 520 respondents (within 33 health organizations) who completed the 5-point Likert-type RCAIN as well as the 8-item "Research Utilization by Nurses" that was used to assess construct validity. Expert scholars translated both survey questionnaires into the Greek language. A baseline one-factor model was compared against three-factor model (i.e., knowledge, skills, and application of knowledge and skills) that were developed based on the hypothetical design of the instrument.

Results

Participants were females (86.4%) 50 years old or younger (91%). The RCAIN had a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.937 and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.440 (95% CI 0.403 to 0.480, p < .001). Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a 3-factor solution (i.e., knowledge, skills, application of knowledge & skills). Fit indices for the three-factor model were statistically superior when compared with the baseline model. Reliability and validity of each subscale were acceptable. Further assessment of construct validity using hypothesis testing indicated that there is a statistically significant difference in research utilization by knowledgeable or not participants. Specifically, the effect size between knowledge synthesis and instrumental research use was eta squared = 0.020, meaning that approximately 2.0% of the variance in instrumental research use scores can be explained by knowledge in methods of knowledge synthesis. The predictive validity, based on correlations between the two instruments, showed that increasing levels of instrumental research use were associated with an increasingly positive and statistically significant pattern of correlations.

Conclusions

The RCAIN survey is a psychometrically sound tool for nurses. Providers, educators, and health administrators may use it for professional development and improvement of individual research competencies.

The Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment (MOST) form completion: a retrospective study

Background

Advance care planning (ACP) involves discussions about patient and families’ wishes and preferences for future healthcare respecting autonomy, improving quality of care, and reducing overtreatment. The Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment (MOST) form records person preferred level and types of treatment and intervention.

Purpose

To examine the MOST form use in inpatient units within a British Columbia (Canada) hospital, estimate and compare its completion rate, and inform health policies for continuous, quality and individualized patient care.

Methods

About 5,000 patients admitted to the participating tertiary acute care hospital during October 2020. Data from 780 eligible participants in medical, surgical, or psychiatry unit were analyzed with descriptive statistics, the chi-square test for group comparisons, and logistic regression to assess predictors of the MOST form completion.

Results

Participants’ (54% men) age ranged from 20–97 years (mean = 59.53, SD = 19.54). Mainly physicians (99.1%) completed the MOST form for about 60% of them. A statistically significant difference of MOST completion found among the units [Pearson χ²_{(df=2, n=780)} = 79.53, p < .001, φ = .319]. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06) and unit admission (OR = .60, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.99 in psychiatry; and OR = .21, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.31 in surgery) were independently associated with the MOST form completion.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrate a need for consistent and broad completion of the MOST form across all jurisdictions using, desirably, advanced electronic systems. Healthcare providers need to raise awareness of the MOST completion benefits and be prepared to discuss topics relevant to end-of-life. Further research is required on the MOST form completion.

A cross-sectional study of patient safety culture in acute-care hospitals in Greece

Background

The development of a culture of safety can bring about an improvement in patient safety and quality of care. We aimed to investigate patient safety culture within an acute-care hospital setting in Greece.

Methods

A cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) questionnaire in two large acute-care hospitals in Greece. We examined questionnaire’s factorial structure using confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis. We assessed scales’ internal consistency, test–retest reliability and construct validity. To assess changes in patient safety culture, we conducted surveys at two points in time (2009 and 2014). Regression analysis examined whether any changes in scale scores could have been due to quality programs implementation or participants’ professional characteristics.

Results

Six scales with satisfactory psychometric properties emerged, namely ‘Teamwork Across Hospital Units’, ‘Teamwork Within Hospital Units’, ‘Feedback and Communication About Error’, ‘Frequency of Event Reporting’, ‘Supervisor/Manager Expectations and ‘Actions Promoting Safety’, ‘Hospital Management Support for Patient Safety’. Overall ratings of patient safety did not change over time. However, one of the two institutions experienced an increase in reported events.

Conclusions

The HSOPSC is a valuable tool for assessing patient safety culture in Greece. Moreover, despite the radical reduction in the financing of the Greek National Health System reported between 2009 and 2014, patient safety culture did not deteriorate. A worldwide trend towards increasing patient safety awareness, along with the increasing effort of hospitals’ administration to support patient safety might explain this lack of differences between the two points in time.

Patient-Oriented Research Competencies in Health (PORCH) for patients, healthcare providers, decision-makers and researchers: protocol of a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient-Oriented Research (POR) is a Canadian initiative for health research that refers to research processes informed by full and active patient involvement in all aspects of the research. Ideally, POR results in a wide dissemination of the research findings and the uptake of such findings in both clinical practice and health policy. The Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) identifies four stakeholder groups that are involved in POR who are envisioned to take on a collaborative role in enacting this approach to research. Those stakeholder groups are patients, researchers, health care providers and healthcare decision-makers. To achieve collaboration among stakeholders in POR, tools, resources, education/training and capacity building are required for each stakeholder group engaged in this work. Therefore, this review focuses on understanding and articulating competencies needed by participants to engage in POR. The aim is to summarize existing knowledge on discrete POR competencies for the four stakeholder groups; to support collaboration among them for uptake and strengthening of POR; and to inform policy, education and future research. Accordingly, our research question is 'What are the POR core competencies needed by patients, researchers, healthcare providers, and decision-makers?' The main objectives are to (1) systematically explore the academic and grey literature on competencies needed for these stakeholder groups to engage in POR; (2) map the eligible publications and research gaps in this area; (3) gain knowledge to support collaboration among stakeholders; and (4) provide recommendations for further research to use competencies that emerge in developing stakeholder groups' readiness to conduct POR.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will use a methodologically rigorous scoping review approach including formulation of the research question and development of the protocol; screening and identification of the literature; selection of relevant studies; data extraction; and collation, summary and report of the results. Our eligibility criteria include elements of population (patients, researchers, healthcare providers and decision-makers); concept (competencies: knowledge, skills, attitudes; and POR); context (level of involvement in research, settings, funding sources); study design (sample, stakeholder group, methodology, grey literature, theoretical framework); outcomes (primary: relevant to decision-making/policy and practice; and secondary: relevant to education and research); language (English, French); and timing (1990-2017). Registration with PROSPERO is not eligible for scoping reviews; so, it has not been registered.

DISCUSSION

Research on core competencies required to enact POR is in its infancy. In this review, we can articulate what is known and thought about competencies (knowledge, skills and attitudes) needed by individuals on POR research teams and ultimately provide knowledge that could impact research, practice, education and policy. Identification of competencies can contribute to design of healthcare professionals' basic and ongoing educational programmes, patient training in research, and professional development activities for health care providers and decision-makers. In addition, knowledge of core competencies can permit individuals to evaluate their own readiness to enter POR research teams.

Core knowledge translation competencies: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Knowledge translation (KT) is the broad range of activities aimed at supporting the use of research findings leading to evidence-based practice (EBP) and policy. Recommendations have been made that capacity building efforts be established to support individuals to enact KT. In this study, we summarized existing knowledge on KT competencies to provide a foundation for such capacity building efforts and to inform policy and research. Our research questions were "What are the core KT competencies needed in the health sector?" and "What are the interventions and strategies to teach and reinforce those competencies?"

METHODS

We used a scoping review approach and an integrated KT process by involving an Advisory Group of diverse stakeholders. We searched seven health and interdisciplinary electronic databases and grey literature sources for materials published from 2003 to 2017 in English language only. Empirical and theoretical publications in health that examined KT competencies were retrieved, reviewed, and synthesized.

RESULTS

Overall, 1171 publications were retrieved; 137 were fully reviewed; and 15 empirical and six conceptual academic, and 52 grey literature publications were included and synthesized in this scoping review. From both the academic and grey literature, we categorized 19 KT core competencies into knowledge, skills, or attitudes; and identified commonly used interventions and strategies to enhance KT competencies such as education, organizational support and hands-on training.

CONCLUSIONS

These initial core KT competencies for individuals provide implications for education, policy, knowledge brokering, and future research, and on the need for future evaluation of the KT competencies presented. We also discuss the essential role of organizational support and culture for successful KT activities/practice.

Protocol of a scoping review on knowledge translation competencies

BACKGROUND

Knowledge translation (KT) activities can reduce the gap between "what is known" and "what is done". Several factors hinder or facilitate KT activities including individual characteristics and organizational attributes; we will focus on individual healthcare professional modifiable characteristics. The purpose of this scoping review is to summarize knowledge on KT competencies for knowledge users, knowledge brokers, and knowledge producers/researchers to support evidence-based practice (EBP) and inform policy and research in health. Our objectives are to explore the relevant theoretical and empirical literature; map the publications for key themes and research gaps of KT competencies, and interventions for enhancing KT competencies; summarize and disseminate findings; produce an action plan and research agenda; and develop self-assessment tools (the KT Pathways) for professional development for our three target audiences.

METHODS

The scoping review method will guide our study by following six stages: formulating the research question; identifying relevant studies; selecting the literature; charting the data; collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and developing a KT plan and consulting stakeholders involved in the fields of KT, EBP, evidence-informed policy-making, and/or research. We will include empirical and theoretical/conceptual peer-reviewed and grey literature in health that examine knowledge user, knowledge broker and knowledge producer KT competencies. Publications written in the English language and published after 2003 only will be considered. Our multidisciplinary research team will collaborate using technology (i.e., WebEx for discussions and a Web 2.0 website for storing documents). Our KT plan consists of an Advisory Group and dissemination plan of the findings.

DISCUSSION

We expect the identified KT competencies to contribute to the KT science by providing positive outcomes in practice, policy, education, and future research. Incorporation of the core KT competencies may enhance safety, effectiveness of clinical care, and quality of health outcomes; contribute to and facilitate collaboration among practitioners, knowledge users, knowledge brokers, researchers, employers, and educators; improve education of healthcare professionals and inform policy-making process; benefit practitioners by guiding their KT professional development to become effective at moving evidence into practice and policy; guide suitable interventions and strategies to enhance KT activities in the health sector; and direct future research.

Nurse specialty subcultures and patient outcomes in acute care hospitals: A multiple-group structural equation modeling

BACKGROUND

Hospital organizational culture is widely held to matter to the delivery of services, their effectiveness, and system performance in general. However, little empirical evidence exists to support that culture affects provider and patient outcomes; even less evidence exists to support how this occurs.

OBJECTIVES

To explore causal relationships and mechanisms between nursing specialty subcultures and selected patient outcomes (i.e., quality of care, adverse patient events).

METHOD

Martin's differentiation perspective of culture (nested subcultures within organizations) was used as a theoretical framework to develop and test a model. Hospital nurse subcultures were identified as being reflected in formal practices (i.e., satisfactory salary, continuing education, quality assurance program, preceptorship), informal practices (i.e., autonomy, control over practice, nurse-physician relationships), and content themes (i.e., emotional exhaustion). A series of structural equation models were assessed using LISREL on a large nurse survey database representing four specialties (i.e., medical, surgical, intensive care, emergency) in acute care hospitals in Alberta, Canada.

RESULTS

Nursing specialty subcultures differentially influenced patient outcomes. Specifically, quality of care (a) was affected by nurses' control over practice, (b) was better in intensive care than in medical specialty, and (c) was related to lower adverse patient events; nurses in intensive care and emergency specialties reported fewer adverse events than did their counterparts in medical specialties.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the meaning of subcultures in clinical settings would influence nurses and administrators efforts to implement clinical change and affect outcomes. More research is needed on nested subcultures within healthcare organizations for better understanding differentiated subspecialty effects on complexity of care and outcomes in hospitals.

A comparison of research utilization among nurses working in Canadian civilian and United States Army healthcare settings

Researchers and theorists working in the field of knowledge translation point to the importance of organizational context in influencing research utilization. The study purpose was to compare research utilization in two different healthcare contexts--Canadian civilian and United States (US) Army settings. Contrary to the investigators' expectations, research utilization scores were lower in US Army settings, after controlling for potential predictors. In-service attendance, library access, belief suspension, gender, and years of experience interacted significantly with the setting (military or civilian) for research utilization. Predictors of research utilization common to both settings were attitude and belief suspension. Predictors in the US Army setting were trust and years of experience, and in the Canadian civilian setting were in-service attendance, time (organizational), research champion, and library access. While context is of central importance, individual and organizational predictors interact with context in important although not well-understood ways, and should not be ignored.