Literature DB >> 21214303

Does sharing research data with participating hospices affect practice?

Karen A Kehl1, Kayla N McCarty.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The research question guiding this study was, "Does receiving individualized feedback about the findings of a research study that the hospice participated in affect clinical practice?" Three issues were examined: (1) Did anyone at the hospice recall receiving the research results? (2) Were the findings shared with the hospice staff? and (3) Did the findings influence clinical practice in the hospice?
METHODS: The sample was 170 hospices that participated in a previous study examining the written materials used by hospices to prepare families for death. Participating hospices were sent individualized feedback concerning the signs of impending death and types of information that were present in their hospice's materials. Approximately 1 year later, participating hospices received a follow-up survey.
RESULTS: Sixty-five hospices (40.1%) completed the survey, 33 of these (50.8%) said they received the results of the previous research, 9 (13.8%) said they did not, and 23 (35.4%) said they did not know. All hospices that said that they received the data shared it with the others in the agency. Twenty-six (78.8% of those who recalled receiving the data) said that they made some change to how they prepare families for the patient's death and 11 said the changes were related to the research results they received.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that providing feedback to agencies or individuals who participate in some descriptive studies may be used to promote improvements in clinical care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21214303      PMCID: PMC3037810          DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2010.0181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Palliat Med        ISSN: 1557-7740            Impact factor:   2.947


  8 in total

Review 1.  Self-regulation theory and coping with physical illness.

Authors:  J E Johnson
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 2.228

2.  Why do residents fail to answer their clinical questions? A qualitative study of barriers to practicing evidence-based medicine.

Authors:  Michael L Green; Tanya R Ruff
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Inpatient general medicine is evidence based. A-Team, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine.

Authors:  J Ellis; I Mulligan; J Rowe; D L Sackett
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-08-12       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 4.  Barriers and facilitators of research utilization. An integrative review.

Authors:  S G Funk; E M Tornquist; M T Champagne
Journal:  Nurs Clin North Am       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 1.208

5.  Evidence based general practice: a retrospective study of interventions in one training practice.

Authors:  P Gill; A C Dowell; R D Neal; N Smith; P Heywood; A E Wilson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-03-30

6.  Barriers and facilitators to the utilization of nursing research.

Authors:  D L Carroll; R Greenwood; K E Lynch; J K Sullivan; C H Ready; J B Fitzmaurice
Journal:  Clin Nurse Spec       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 1.067

7.  Materials to prepare hospice families for dying in the home.

Authors:  Karen A Kehl; Karin T Kirchhoff; Mark P Finster; James F Cleary
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.947

8.  Barriers to evidence-based practice in primary care.

Authors:  Hugh P McKenna; Sue Ashton; Sinead Keeney
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.187

  8 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  The value of data collection within a palliative care program.

Authors:  Arif H Kamal; David C Currow; Christine Ritchie; Janet Bull; Jane L Wheeler; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 5.075

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.