| Literature DB >> 31745416 |
Ibrahim Saleh Al-Busaidi1, Saud Zahran Al Suleimani2, Jonas Usbal Dupo2, Nasser Khalfan Al Sulaimi2, Vijayalakshmi Gopalan Nair3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Little attention has been paid to the study of evidence-based practice (EBP) among nurses in Oman. Our aim was to explore knowledge, practice, and attitudes towards EBP among nurses working in Oman.Entities:
Keywords: Attitudes; Evidence-Based Practice; Knowledge; Nurses; Oman
Year: 2019 PMID: 31745416 PMCID: PMC6851074 DOI: 10.5001/omj.2019.95
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oman Med J ISSN: 1999-768X
Demographic characteristics of study participants.
| Variables | n | Percentage, % |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical setting (n = 202) | ||
| Local hospitals | 96 | 47.5 |
| Primary health centers and polyclinics | 86 | 42.6 |
| School nursing services | 20 | 9.9 |
| Age, mean ± SD (range), years (n = 188) | 32.4 ± 4.7 (23–52) | |
| Age, years, (n = 188) | ||
| 23–28 | 40 | 21.3 |
| 29–34 | 90 | 47.9 |
| 35–40 | 52 | 27.7 |
| ≥ 41 | 6 | 3.2 |
| Gender (n = 201) | ||
| Female | 186 | 92.5 |
| Male | 15 | 7.5 |
| Marital status (n = 199) | ||
| Single | 16 | 8.0 |
| Married | 183 | 92.0 |
| Highest educational degree (n = 200) | ||
| Diploma in nursing | 147 | 73.5 |
| Post-basic diploma | 17 | 8.5 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 35 | 17.5 |
| Master’s degree | 1 | 0.5 |
| Designation/role (n = 200) | ||
| Staff nurse | 184 | 92.0 |
| Nurse-in-charge | 7 | 3.5 |
| Head of nursing | 2 | 1.0 |
| Others | 7 | 3.5 |
| Nationality (n = 201) | ||
| Omani | 159 | 79.1 |
| Filipino | 22 | 10.9 |
| Indian | 19 | 9.5 |
| Tunisian | 1 | 0.5 |
| MOH experience, mean ± SD (range), years (n = 198) | 9.9 ± 4.5 (1–20) | |
| 1–5 | 36 | 18.2 |
| 6–10 | 72 | 36.4 |
| 11–15 | 68 | 34.3 |
| 16–20 | 22 | 11.1 |
| Experience mean ± SD (range), years (n = 199) | 10.9 ± 4.2 (1–28) | |
| 1–5 | 16 | 8.0 |
| 6–10 | 83 | 41.7 |
| 11–15 | 73 | 36.7 |
| 16–20 | 24 | 12.1 |
| ≥ 21 | 3 | 1.5 |
SD: standard deviation; MOH: Ministry of Health.
Mean scores and standard deviations of EBPQ subscales.
| Items | n | Score, | Response | Priority item rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | 4.9 ± 0.8 | |||
| Research skills | 201 | 4.2 ± 1.3 | 116 (57.7) | 1 |
| IT skills | 199 | 4.9 ± 1.2 | 70 (35.2) | 6 |
| Monitoring and reviewing practice skills | 198 | 5.0 ± 1.0 | 55 (27.8) | 11 |
| Converting information needs into a question | 198 | 4.5 ± 1.2 | 101 (51.0) | 2 |
| Awareness of information types and sources | 201 | 4.6 ± 1.1 | 92 (45.8) | 3 |
| Able to identify gaps in own practice | 198 | 4.9 ± 1.1 | 66 (33.3) | 7 |
| Knowledge of how to retrieve evidence | 198 | 4.7 ± 1.0 | 86 (43.4) | 4 |
| Ability to critically appraise | 200 | 4.7 ± 1.2 | 83 (41.5) | 5 |
| Ability to determine the validity of material | 201 | 4.9 ± 1.1 | 64 (31.8) | 8 |
| Able to determine usefulness of material | 201 | 5.0 ± 1.2 | 60 (29.9) | 9 |
| Apply information to individual cases | 200 | 5.1 ± 1.1 | 57 (28.5) | 10 |
| Sharing ideas/information with colleagues | 200 | 5.5 ± 1.2 | 50 (25.0) | 12 |
| Dissemination of new ideas with colleagues | 199 | 5.3 ± 1.1 | 45 (22.6) | 13 |
| Ability to review own practice | 201 | 5.4 ± 1.1 | 41 (20.4) | 14 |
| Practice | 4.7 ± 1.2 | |||
| Formulate clear question | 199 | 4.3±1.2 | 114 (57.3) | 2 |
| Track down relevant evidence | 200 | 4.3 ± 1.3 | 108 (54.0) | 3 |
| Critically appraise literature | 196 | 3.8 ± 1.4 | 123 (62.8) | 1 |
| Integrate the evidence with expertise | 200 | 4.9 ± 1.3 | 70 (35.0) | 4 |
| Evaluate outcomes of practice | 200 | 5.4 ± 1.3 | 58 (29.0) | 5 |
| Share information with colleagues | 200 | 5.4 ± 1.3 | 50 (25.0) | 6 |
| Attitudes | 5.5 ± 1.2 | |||
| Workload | 197 | 5.3 ± 1.4 | 60 (30.5) | 1 |
| Resent questioning versus welcome questioning about clinical practice | 199 | 5.6 ± 1.4 | 46 (23.1) | 2 |
| EBP waste of time | 199 | 5.6 ± 1.6 | 41 (20.6) | 3 |
| Stick to old ways versus change | 199 | 5.7 ± 1.3 | 33 (16.6) | 4 |
EBPQ: evidence-based practice questionnaire; SD: standard deviation; IT: information technology.
Mean scores and standard deviations of EBPQ subscales by clinical setting.
| Clinical setting | EBPQ subscales (mean ± SD) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Practice | Attitudes | |
| Local hospitals (n = 96) | 4.8 ± 0.8 | 4.6 ± 1.5 | 5.5 ± 1.2 |
| Primary health centers and polyclinics (n = 85) | 4.9 ± 0.8 | 4.7 ± 0.9 | 5.6 ± 1.1 |
| School nursing services (n = 20) | 5.3 ± 0.8 | 5.0 ± 1.1 | 5.35 ± 1.31 |
| Significance | aF = 2.819, | bχ2 = 5.36, df = 2, | bχ2 = 1.66, df = 2, |
EBPQ: evidence-based practice questionnaire; SD: standard deviation.
aOne-way analysis of variance. bKruskal-Wallis test.
Relationships between nurses’ demographic and professional variables and their scores on the EBPQ subscales.
| Variables | EBPQ subscale | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Practice | Attitudes | ||||
| Age | 0.113 | 0.124 | 0.105 | 0.152 | 0.168 | 0.022 |
| Gender | 0.084 | 0.239 | 0.099 | 0.162 | 0.027 | 0.702 |
| Marital status | 0.023 | 0.749 | - 0.026 | 0.711 | 0.043 | 0.546 |
| Nationality | 0.054 | 0.449 | - 0.028 | 0.695 | 0.098 | 0.169 |
| Education level | 0.094 | 0.187 | 0.056 | 0.433 | 0.090 | 0.205 |
| Designation/role | - 0.019 | 0.794 | 0.058 | 0.412 | - 0.021 | 0.766 |
| Years of experience in MOH institutions | 0.090 | 0.211 | 0.135 | 0.058 | 0.138 | 0.054 |
| Total years of experience | 0.145 | 0.041 | 0.172 | 0.015 | 0.158 | 0.026 |
EBPQ: evidence-based practice questionnaire; MOH: Ministry of Health. rs = Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.