The "evidence-based practice inventory": reliability and validity was demonstrated for a novel instrument to identify barriers and facilitators for Evidence Based Practice in health care.

OBJECTIVES: To design and validate a practical questionnaire for clinicians, to identify barriers and facilitators for evidence-based practice (EBP), that is, the use of research evidence in patient care. The inventory is ultimately intended for departments to assess local conditions for EBP, to aim and evaluate efforts at improving or maximizing EBP. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We derived candidate items from existing EBP scales, psychology, and behavioral economics. In an online Delphi study, 537 international expert clinicians, researchers, teachers, and policymakers interested in EBP identified items with sufficient face and content validity. We piloted and validated the resulting draft inventory among 127 clinicians from various specialties and career stages. RESULTS: The Delphi study started with 114 items and resulted in a draft inventory with 29 items in five dimensions. During the pilot, the inventory was easy to complete within 15 minutes and the items showed sufficient response variation. In four of five dimensions, test-retest reliability was substantial to almost perfect and the power to discriminate between groups with different expertise was adequate, whereas internal consistency showed that the items generally measured the same construct. On the basis of internal consistency and factor analysis, we excluded three items. The final EBP inventory consists of 26 items in five dimensions: decision making, subjective norm, attitude, perceived behavior control, and intention and behavior. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The EBP inventory was developed with support of EBP experts and validated among various academic clinicians. It shows adequate face and content validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, discriminative power, and completion will take <15 minutes. We recommend further evaluation of its value in field trials.

Doctors' perceptions and use of evidence-based medicine: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

PURPOSE: Many primary qualitative studies of barriers and facilitators for doctors' use of evidence-based medicine (EBM) are available, but knowledge remains fragmented. This study sought to synthesize the results of these qualitative studies, taking the variability across context (i.e., medical disciplines, career stages, practice settings, and time of study) into account. METHOD: The authors searched PubMed through April 26, 2012, and independently selected studies according to prespecified criteria for relevance and methodological quality. Additionally, they performed a thematic synthesis through line-by-line interpretation, coding, and thematic arrangement of information. RESULTS: The search resulted in 1,211 publications, of which 30 studies were included. Five major themes emerged on barriers and facilitators for doctors' use of EBM: individual mind-set, professional group norms, EBM competencies, balance between confidence and critical reflection, and managerial collaboration. The authors found particular barriers and facilitators across career stages. Although clinical experience and professional status were perceived to be helpful, they could also prevent doctors from identifying information needs and adopting new evidence. Although residents' lack of clinical experience raised awareness of information needs, residents perceived lack of clinical experience and their hierarchical dependence on staff as barriers to articulating information needs and to translating and introducing evidence to patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Encouragement of group norms for safe communication and shared learning across career stages is perceived as the most prominent facilitator for EBM.