MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2792592000 · doi:10.1111/jocn.14280

Leadership behaviours play a significant role in implementing evidence‐based practice

2018· letter· en· W2792592000 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Jiale Hu, Wendy Gifford

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2018
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHealth Policy Implementation Science
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of Ottawa
Mots-clésPsychologyContext (archaeology)Contingency theoryShared leadershipFoundation (evidence)Public relationsTransactional leadershipContingencyLeadership styleVariety (cybernetics)LeadershipCross-cultural leadershipServant leadershipSocial psychologyNeuroleadershipPolitical scienceManagementEpistemology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

To the Editors: We read with great interest the Cheng, Broome, Feng, and Hu (2017) article that explored factors that influence implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) in nursing in China (Cheng et al., 2017). This study identified a variety of factors and provided a strong foundation for further studies. For example, the roles of project leaders were one of the factors; however, we believe that leadership behaviours are missing and must be considered in Chinese nursing. We wish to offer further insights in this commentary. It is well understood that leadership is an important factor that influences the implementation of EBP. However, leadership is much more than a role, position or status (Shaw, 2007). Based on contingency theory, leadership involves the person who is the leader, the setting in which they work and the people in which they lead or the followers (Fiedler, 1971). Behaviours are the “manner of conducting oneself in the external relations” (Oxford English dictionary 2018), and leadership behaviours are the interactions and activities that leaders take with their staff and people in their organisation to impact the workplace setting, culture and staff. Leadership role theory illustrates that behaviours are influenced by past experiences leaders have had and the subjective efforts they make to influence followers towards a vision or goals (Winkler, 2010). Thus, different leaders in the same role may interact differently with staff and use different activities and strategies in different settings to facilitate EBP. Even the same leader can use different behaviours over time as the context, staff and leaders themselves evolve, despite there being no change to a leader's formal role or position. As social learning theory has shown, leaders can improve or adapt their behaviours to be more effective after they learn, reflect and incorporate feedback from interactions in the classroom and workplace settings (Bandura, 1977). The leadership behaviours for facilitating implementation of EBP have been studied by a number of scholars. For example, Gifford, Graham, Ehrhart, Davies, and Aarons (2017) developed the Ottawa Model of Implementation Leadership (O-MILe) based on an integrative literature review and research. The fourth generation of the O-MILe includes three meta-categories of effective leadership behaviours for implementing EBP in healthcare settings: (i) relations-oriented (four activities), (ii) change-oriented (four activities) and (iii) task-oriented behaviours (six activities) (Gifford et al., 2017). Aarons, Ehrhart, and Farahnak (2014) developed the Implementation Leadership Scale (ILS) to measure leadership for implementing EBP, and the scale has been validated with good psychometric scores (Aarons et al., 2014). The ILS had four dimensions representing proactive, knowledgeable, supportive and perseverant leadership, which includes 12 specific leadership behaviours. A concept mapping study illustrated that the items of the ILS strongly aligned to the theoretical constructs of the O-MILe (Gifford et al., 2017). Although specific behaviours are essential to leading the implementation of EBP, universally effective behaviours have not been determined. What leaders do must be based on leaders’ evaluations of themselves, the settings and followers. Thus, interventions and programmes for developing implementation leadership need not only to include theory for understanding what leadership is and how it works, but must also include leadership coaching in real-world settings. The O-MILE has been used in different healthcare settings to guide leadership development programmes to implement EBP in nursing (Gifford et al., 2017). In these programmes, leaders received knowledge and skills to carry out effective leadership behaviours for implementing EBP through interactive worzx kshops and real-world coaching. This includes theory on leadership, EBP, implementation methods, engagement, goal setting for change and context-specific information on current practices and audit methods. Participants then built a plan of the specific leadership behaviours they would engage in, and were coached in their work setting to operationalise the plan for implementing EBP. In 2016, we started an international China/Canada collaborative research project to develop leadership behaviours for implementing evidence-based pain management practices in paediatric nursing in China. Our international research team includes two professors in Canada and two in USA, one chief nursing director and one head nurse in China, and an international Ph.D. student from China who is studying at the University of Ottawa, Canada. In this project, we have translated and validated the ILS into Chinese and assessed barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based pain management practices in paediatric nursing in China. Based on this very specific Chinese context, we have developed an implementation leadership strategy guided by the O-MILe that will be pilot tested and evaluated. Previous research has clearly told us that leadership is critical for implementing EBP in nursing. However, we suggest that what leaders do in their work setting to influence staff and the organisational environment is equally as important as the role or position they have. As few studies on implementation leadership exist in nursing, we strongly recommended that more intervention research is needed to understand how leadership improves implementation of EBP and open the “black box” on implementation leadership in China. Thanks are due to international research collaborators. The authors appreciate Hong Ruan, Denise Harrison, Gregory Aarons and Mark Ehrhart for their efforts and great contributions. None.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,054
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,071
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesMétarecherche, Intégrité de la recherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,051
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0540,071
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,013
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,816
Tête enseignante GPT0,738
Écart entre enseignants0,078 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations23
Publié2018
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Clinical NursingMême sujetHealth Policy Implementation ScienceTravaux en français237 207