Duffy Joanne R, Culp Stacey, Sand-Jecklin Kari, Stroupe Lya, Lucke-Wold Noelle
Author Affiliations: Professor (Dr Duffy), Clinical Associate Professor (Dr Culp), Associate Professor (Dr Sand-Jecklin), and Research Assistant (Ms Lucke-Wold), School of Nursing, West Virginia University; and Manager of Nursing Research and Professional Development (Dr Stroupe), West Virginia University Hospitals, Morgantown.
J Nurs Adm. 2016 Jan;46(1):12-7. doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000287.
The aim of this study was to compare baseline and year 1 findings from a research-focused academic-service partnership (ASP) designed to increase research capacity, evidence-based practice (EBP) use, and research productivity.
Few combined individual and organizational best practices could be found that successfully sustain EBP. An ASP model, using structural and enabling processes, was evaluated.
Using a nonexperimental pretest-posttest design, 67 acute care nurses who participated at baseline were resurveyed, and year 1 focus groups were conducted.
Knowledge increased from baseline to year 1, and nurses who participated on a committee with an embedded scientist were more knowledgeable at year 1 than those who did not. While EBP confidence and self-reported EBP use did not improve, research productivity increased 33%. Year 1 focus groups identified facilitators and barriers.
Findings support some EBP benefits related to a research-focused ASP including research productivity; however, implementation barriers and contextual factors may have limited potential outcomes.
本研究旨在比较一项以研究为重点的学术-服务伙伴关系（ASP）在基线期和第1年的研究结果，该伙伴关系旨在提高研究能力、循证实践（EBP）的应用以及研究生产力。
很少能找到成功维持循证实践的个人和组织的最佳实践组合。对一种使用结构和促进流程的ASP模式进行了评估。
采用非实验性的前测-后测设计，对67名在基线期参与的急症护理护士进行了重新调查，并开展了第1年的焦点小组访谈。
从基线期到第1年，知识有所增加，在设有专职科学家的委员会中参与的护士在第1年比未参与的护士知识更丰富。虽然循证实践的信心和自我报告的循证实践应用没有改善，但研究生产力提高了33%。第1年的焦点小组确定了促进因素和障碍。
研究结果支持了与以研究为重点的ASP相关的一些循证实践益处，包括研究生产力；然而，实施障碍和背景因素可能限制了潜在结果。
