aSchool of Nursing and Health Studies, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida bJames Bell Associates, Inc., Arlington, Virginia cCarson Research Consulting, Baltimore, Maryland dMaximus, McLean, Virginia, USA.
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2016 Jun;14(2):84-94. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000072.
Printed educational materials (PEMs) are one of the most common dissemination strategies for communicating information about evidence-based practices (EBPs) to healthcare professionals and organizations; however, evidence is conflicting regarding the conditions and circumstances in which PEMs are effective in achieving desired outcomes. The effectiveness of PEMs is largely dependent on the manner in which they are developed. This article reports on the findings from a comprehensive review of the literature regarding best practices for creating PEMs for health professionals and illustrates how these practices were used to design, develop, and evaluate an informational packet to disseminate information about motivational interviewing.
The informational packet was disseminated to 92 community health organizations not currently implementing motivational interviewing. Evaluation surveys were completed by 212 healthcare directors and providers to examine quality and perceived helpfulness of the packets, intention to use information from the packet, and sharing of the packet with others. Associations between these and individual and organizational characteristics were also assessed.
Overall, the packet was perceived as appropriate and helpful in making a decision to implement motivational interviewing. For example, 84.9% of participants stated that the content was 'about right'. Three-quarters (75.9%) of participants reported plans to use the information in the packet and almost half (46.7%) reported talking about the packet with others in the organizations. Higher levels of baseline interest in motivational interviewing adoption were significantly related to packet use and wanting to utilize additional resources presented in the packet. Positive attitudes toward EBPs were also significantly related to the desire to obtain resources in the packet. Perceptions of the packet did not differ by type of community health organization (i.e., community health center, community behavioral health organization) or whether the individual was a director or provider.
Results indicated that PEMs can be a useful tool to disseminate EBP information to healthcare professionals particularly if they have a prior interest in the EBP and have general attitudes supportive of EBPs. Recommendations for the improvement of future PEMs are discussed.
印刷教育材料（PEMs）是向医疗保健专业人员和组织传播循证实践（EBPs）信息的最常见传播策略之一；然而，关于 PEMs 在实现预期结果方面的有效性的条件和情况，证据存在冲突。PEMs 的有效性在很大程度上取决于它们的开发方式。本文报告了对关于为健康专业人员创建 PEMs 的最佳实践的文献进行全面审查的结果，并说明了如何使用这些实践来设计、开发和评估信息包，以传播有关动机访谈的信息。
将信息包分发给 92 个尚未实施动机访谈的社区卫生组织。212 名医疗保健主任和提供者完成了评估调查，以检查数据包的质量和感知有用性、使用数据包信息的意愿以及与他人共享数据包的情况。还评估了这些因素与个人和组织特征之间的关联。
总体而言，该数据包被认为在做出实施动机访谈的决定方面是合适和有帮助的。例如，84.9%的参与者表示内容“恰到好处”。四分之三（75.9%）的参与者表示计划使用数据包中的信息，近一半（46.7%）的参与者表示与组织中的其他人讨论了数据包。对采用动机访谈的基线兴趣水平较高与数据包的使用和希望利用数据包中提供的其他资源显著相关。对 EBPs 的积极态度也与获取数据包中资源的愿望显著相关。对数据包的看法不因社区卫生组织的类型（即社区卫生中心、社区行为健康组织）或个人是主任还是提供者而有所不同。
结果表明，PEMs 可以成为向医疗保健专业人员传播 EBP 信息的有用工具，特别是如果他们对 EBP 有先验兴趣并且对 EBPs 有普遍的支持态度。讨论了改进未来 PEMs 的建议。
