Evidence-based healthcare competence of social- and healthcare educators: A cross-sectional study.

AIM: The purpose of the study was to describe social and healthcare educators' evidence-based healthcare competence and explore the associated factors. DESIGN: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was carried out. METHODS: The research spanned 5 universities, 19 universities of applied sciences, and 10 vocational colleges in Finland from September to December 2022. Social and healthcare educators (n = 256), of which 21 worked at universities, 176 worked at universities of applied sciences, and 49 worked at vocational colleges. Data collection employed a self-assessed instrument that was designed to measure evidence-based healthcare competence based on the JBI Model of Evidence-based Healthcare. Competence profiles were formed using K-cluster grouping analysis. RESULTS: The educators' self-evaluations of their level of evidence-based healthcare competence were generally at a satisfactory level, with subsequent analyses identifying four distinct profiles of evidence-based healthcare competence. The profiles demonstrated statistically significant differences in terms of evidence synthesis and evidence transfer competencies. The factors associated with evidence-based healthcare competence included level of education, the year in which a professional had obtained their highest degree, current organization of employment, and participation in continuing education. CONCLUSIONS: Educators require various types of support for developing high levels of evidence-based healthcare competence. The identification of distinct competence profiles can be pivotal to providing educators with training that is tailored to their exact needs to provide an individualized learning path. WHAT PROBLEM DID THE STUDY ADDRESS?: Educators value the role of evidence in teaching, which reinforces the need to integrate aspects of the JBI Model of evidence-based healthcare into educators' competencies. Aspects of the JBI Model of evidence-based healthcare have not been holistically measured, with only certain components of the model considered separately. Educators need to better understand the global healthcare environment so they can identify research gaps and subsequently develop healthcare systems through their educational role. Higher academic education, work experience, organizational support, and continuous education play essential roles in the development of educators' evidence-based healthcare competence. WHAT WERE THE MAIN FINDINGS?: Educators generally have high levels of competence in evidence-based healthcare. Educators have mastered the different components of the JBI model of evidence-based healthcare but need to improve in areas such as the transfer and implementation of evidence. WHERE AND ON WHOM WILL THE RESEARCH HAVE AN IMPACT?: Determining evidence-based healthcare competence profiles for educators can be used to provide individualized learning paths for the development of evidence-based healthcare competence. Educators need to further develop their competence in evidence-based healthcare to ensure successful implementation and high-quality education in the future. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Advanced practice nurses' evidence-based healthcare competence and associated factors: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) enables consistent and effective healthcare that prioritises patient safety. The competencies of advanced practice nurses (APNs) are essential for implementing EBHC because their professional duties include promoting EBHC. AIM: To identify, critically appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence concerning the EBHC competence of APNs and associated factors. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Medic, ProQuest, and MedNar. METHODS: Databases were searched for studies (until 19 September 2023) that examined the EBHC competence and associated factors of APNs were included. Quantitative studies published in English, Swedish and Finnish were included. We followed the JBI methodology for systematic review and performed a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: The review included 12 quantitative studies, using 15 different instruments, and involved 3163 participants. The quality of the studies was fair. The APNs' EBHC competence areas were categorised into five segments according to the JBI EBHC model. The strongest areas of competencies were in global health as a goal, transferring and implementing evidence, while the weakest were generating and synthesising evidence. Evidence on factors influencing APNs' EBHC competencies was contradictory, but higher levels of education and the presence of an organisational research council may be positively associated with APNs' EBHC competencies. CONCLUSION: The development of EBHC competencies for APNs should prioritise evidence generation and synthesis. Elevating the education level of APNs and establishing a Research Council within the organisation can potentially enhance the EBHC competence of APNs. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: We should consider weaknesses in EBHC competence when developing education and practical exercises for APNs. This approach will promote the development of APNs' EBHC competence and EBHC implementation in nursing practice. REGISTRATION, AND REPORTING CHECKLIST: The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021226578), and reporting followed the PRISMA checklist. PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.

Evidence-based healthcare competence of social and healthcare educators: A systematic review of mixed methods.

BACKGROUND: Social and healthcare operating environments are constantly evolving, so educators have major responsibility for ensuring that Evidence-Based Healthcare is included in the education of future healthcare professionals and applied in their practice. A holistic understanding and implementation of evidence-based healthcare competence is critical to the delivery of appropriate, relevant, and effective healthcare. AIM: To identify and describe social and healthcare educators' EBHC competence according to the five main components of the JBI model and associated factors to it. METHODS: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted, with inclusion and exclusion criteria identified according to PICo and PEO inclusion criteria for qualitative and quantitative studies, respectively. Five databases-the CINAHL (EBSCO), PubMed, Scopus, Medic and ProQuest databases- were searched in June 2020. In total, 12 original studies (qualitative and quantitative) were included for quality appraisal, data extraction and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Key competence areas addressed in the selected studies were integrated into the four components of the JBI model of EBHC (evidence generation, synthesis, transfer, and implementation, and focus on its ultimate goal: global health). In the majority of chosen studies', it was found that educators had a positive attitude towards EBHC and wanted to stay up-to-date in the areas of global health and collaboration. Educators demonstrated their abilities to locate, appraise, and interpret the best current relevant evidence. They knew how to integrate EBHC into their teaching and had strong communication skills in evidence transfer. Their EBHC competence was strongest in the educational context and educators could transfer evidence when teaching but were not able to translate it into how to implement EBHC in clinical care. In addition to higher academic education and work experience, organizational support and continuous education reportedly play essential roles in development of educators' EBHC competence. CONCLUSION: Measures are needed to maintain and improve social and health educators' EBHC competence and develop robust methods to reliably assess it.