The Institute of Medicine set a goal that 90 percent of all healthcare decisions will be evidence-based by 2020. Executives and nursing leaders, at all levels within organizations, have clear responsibility for making this goal a reality and ensuring consistent, standardized use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in care delivery that will meet patient, family, clinician, and organizational outcomes.
Promoting use of evidence, valuing questioning of clinical and administrative practice, and building organizational capacity, culture, and commitment are pivotal to building a supportive organizational culture related to EBP.
Organizations must meet regulatory requirements, from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and The Joint Commission, that incorporate EBPs and the need for increasing public accountability and transparency (e.g., use of national benchmarks) for quality and safety. Financial incentives associated with pay-for-performance are also directly linked to EBP. Despite these outside forces in today’s healthcare environment, clinicians and executives cannot forget about the need to provide individualized patient care, which includes patient engagement strategies aimed at improving the overall patient experience.
EBP is a continuous journey for individual clinicians and organizations alike and starts with building organizational capacity.
Organizational Capacity
EBP capacity is built using a strategic, systematic approach to create a solid foundation and infrastructure to support the work. Before EBP work can be successful at the unit or clinic level, EBP must be integrated at the organizational level and a culture for change must exist.
The organization’s mission, vision, and strategic plan must include EBP language to ensure evidence-based healthcare is clearly portrayed as the organizational norm. Creating a culture valuing inquiry and innovation must start during orientation for new hires and continue during competency review for current employees and through ongoing training and professional development opportunities for both clinicians and executive leaders.
An infrastructure that directly integrates EBP work into the organizational governance structure is needed to support the mission, vision, and strategic plan. A crucial organizational decision is determining what group will hold primary accountability or functional responsibility for EBP to ensure it is integrated into practice processes, policies, and documentation.
Recruiting and hiring clinicians and executives with experience and/or interest in EBP will help build the desired culture and capacity. EBP mentors are developed from successful projects and are used to nurture the next generation.
A well-defined path for EBP includes adoption of an EBP-process model to guide implementation and sustained organizational change across disciplines. There are a number of EBP process models: The Iowa Model Revised: Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Excellence in Health Care; Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model; Stetler Model of Evidence-Based Practice; and Advancing Research and Clinical Practice Through Close Collaboration (ARCC) Model. Each model follows a step-by-step problem-solving process suitable for concurrent use with the organization’s quality improvement processes.
Culture
The governance structure must clearly outline the process and channels for communicating EBP work and obtaining necessary approvals from applicable committees. EBP discussions should be a regular agenda item for all shared governance committees.
Project results should be reported internally through the organization’s shared governance and quality improvement structures to promote practice change adoption, share learning, garner continued support (e.g., time, resources), and as a platform to recognize success for the institution’s EBP program.
Successful EBP work takes time and effort, so successes should be celebrated and rewarded throughout the process. Celebrations are an opportunity to spotlight clinicians for doing this work and helps build a pervasive culture that supports and expects use of evidence in practice. These strategies promote organizational buy-in and commitment for the EBP process and set higher standards as a foundation for future efforts.
Expected behaviors from clinicians across all job classifications at every level must clearly demonstrate the value of EBP. Behavioral expectations regarding EBP are easily set if they are built into every job description and can be quickly reviewed annually during the performance appraisal process. Utilizing documents and mechanisms that already occur is an easy and efficient way to promote positive reinforcement and priority setting in busy work environments with many ongoing and competing demands for clinicians’ and leaders’ time and attention.
Benefits
EBP is value-added with a strong return on investment and responds to current priorities. A single project may improve patient and clinician safety, improve clinical outcomes, improve patient/family satisfaction, promote innovate care, and/or reduce costs.
Clinicians, nurses, and leaders all influence an organization’s capacity for EBP. Leaders who demonstrate and expect EBP will promote its use in clinical and operational decision-making at the unit or clinic and organizational levels. Building on the organization’s mission, vision, capacity, and value for delivery of reliable, safe, high quality care provides a foundation for success.
About the Authors:
Michele Farrington, BSN, RN, CPHON, is a clinical healthcare research associate at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics. She is certified in pediatric hematology/oncology nursing and received her BSN from the University of Iowa. She has been leading, co-leading, or mentoring EBP initiatives since 2003, and her work has been awarded extramural funding, validating the strength of the projects and impact on nursing care. She is widely published and has given multiple local, regional, national, and international presentations.
Cindy Dawson, MSN, RN, CORLN, is the chief nurse executive and associate director of the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics. She received her BSN from the University of Iowa, MSN from the University of Phoenix, and is a Certified Otorhinolaryngology Nurse. Over the course of her career, she has published extensively on EBP, nurse triage, nursing management/leadership, and clinical practice guidelines and has given numerous local, regional, national, and international presentations on these topics.
HIN Disclaimer: The opinions, representations and statements made within this guest article are those of the author and not of the Healthcare Intelligence Network as a whole. Any copyright remains with the author and any liability with regard to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with them. The company accepts no liability for any errors, omissions or representations.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently released two rules (one final, one proposed) to advance the Trump administration’s agenda to create a transparent healthcare marketplace. The rules are designed to spur competition that will benefit consumers by making hospital prices and out-of-pocket costs much clearer and to remove the secrecy surrounding contracted prices. If the rules are enacted in a way that’s consistent with the current proposals (which is a big if), the impact to consumers could be wide ranging, but will heavily depend on how payers and providers respond, according to a new infographic by Oliver Wyman.
The perennial challenge for healthcare organizations as they continue to develop and refine programs aimed at improving healthcare quality while reducing costs is engaging patients in these initiatives. Actively engaged patients have been shown to have lower costs and improved outcomes. 
A number of large corporations are taking a unique approach to healthcare by employing a resident physician, nurse practitioner or physician assistant to tend to the needs of workers and their families.
Last week’s unveiling of G.O.P. legislation designed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) triggered a flurry of concerns and criticisms from healthcare industry sectors.
