Instruments to Assess Evidence-Based Practice Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The use of measurement instruments to assess the use of Evidence-Based Practice by health professionals has been frequently reported in studies. AIMS: This systematic review aimed to summarize, describe, and evaluate the measurement properties of the instruments that evaluate the use of Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals. METHODS: The search was carried out in four databases considering three groups of search terms: evidence-based practice, evaluation, and measurement proprieties. Studies were included that described the use of instruments to assess Evidence-Based Practice in health professionals, with the full-text publication, which analyzed the measurement properties, in English. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments. RESULTS: In total, 6,429 were found and only 92 were eligible for data analysis. Forty new instruments were identified most were developed for nursing and physical therapist. The investigators performed at least 1 type of validity test on 73% of the instruments. Reliability was tested at 90%, through internal consistency. Responsiveness was tested on less than half of the instruments (30%). Most of the instruments identified are reliable and valid to measure evidence-based practice in health professionals. CONCLUSION: Although the Fresno Test remains the most complete instrument, and adequate for use. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist classified 7 (seven) instruments as suitable for the target audience.

Reliability, Construct Validity and Interpretability of the Brazilian version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) and Strain Index (SI).

BACKGROUND: There are very few observational methods for analysis of biomechanical exposure available in Brazilian-Portuguese. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt and test the measurement properties of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) and Strain Index (SI). METHODS: The cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties test were established according to Beaton et al. and COSMIN guidelines, respectively. Several tasks that required static posture and/or repetitive motion of upper limbs were evaluated (n>100). RESULTS: The intra-raters' reliability for the RULA ranged from poor to almost perfect (k: 0.00-0.93), and SI from poor to excellent (ICC2.1: 0.05-0.99). The inter-raters' reliability was very poor for RULA (k: -0.12 to 0.13) and ranged from very poor to moderate for SI (ICC2.1: 0.00-0.53). The agreement was good for RULA (75-100% intra-raters, and 42.24-100% inter-raters) and to SI (EPM: -1.03% to 1.97%; intra-raters, and -0.17% to 1.51% inter-raters). The internal consistency was appropriate for RULA (α=0.88), and low for SI (α=0.65). Moderate construct validity were observed between RULA and SI, in wrist/hand-wrist posture (rho: 0.61) and strength/intensity of exertion (rho: 0.39). CONCLUSION: The adapted versions of the RULA and SI presented semantic and cultural equivalence for the Brazilian Portuguese. The RULA and SI had reliability estimates ranged from very poor to almost perfect. The internal consistency for RULA was better than the SI. The correlation between methods was moderate only of muscle request/movement repetition. Previous training is mandatory to use of observations methods for biomechanical exposure assessment, although it does not guarantee good reproducibility of these measures.

Instrumentos para avaliar a prática baseada em evidências na fisioterapia: uma revisão sistemática / Instrument for assessing evidence-based practice in physical therapy: a systematic review

Introdução: A Prática Baseada em Evidências pode ser definida como o uso de evidências científicas relevantes para orientar a tomada de decisão clínica e otimizar os resultados de saúde dos pacientes. Objetivos: Identificar, avaliar e descrever os instrumentos de avaliação da Prática Baseada em Evidências para fisioterapeutas, que estejam traduzidos e adaptados para o português brasileiro, por meio de uma revisão sistemática. Métodos: Realizaram-se buscas sistemáticas nas bases de dados eletrônicas: Embase, SciELO, CINAHL, PubMed e ERIC; e foram utilizados quatro grupos de termos de busca. Resultados: Dos 707 estudos identificados, apenas cinco foram selecionados para revisão de texto completo e, destes, nenhum preencheu os critérios de inclusão para a pesquisa. Conclusão: Os achados demonstraram a inexistência de instrumentos que avaliem a Prática Baseada em Evidências na Fisioterapia, traduzidos e adaptados para o português brasileiro.

Introduction: Evidence-Based Practice can be defined as the use of relevant scientific evidence to guide clinical decision making and optimize health outcomes of patients. Objectives: To identify, to evaluate and to describe the assessment tools of Evidence-Based Practice in the training of physiotherapists that are translated and adapted into Brazilian Portuguese, through a systematic review. Methods: We carried out systematic searches in electronic databases: Embase, SciELO, CINAHL, PubMed and ERIC, and four groups of search terms were used. Results: Of the 707 studies identified, only five were selected for review in full text and of these, none met the inclusion criteria for the study. Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated the lack of tools assess the Evidence-Based Practice in Physical Therapy, translated and adapted into Brazilian Portuguese.