loading page

Psychometric properties of questionnaires to assess evidence-based practice among occupational, physical and speech therapists -- A systematic review
  • +8
  • Julia Balzer,
  • Andrés Jung,
  • Janina Gerhard,
  • Sarah Reinecke,
  • Marco Mijic,
  • Akram Jahja,
  • Marieke Eggert ,
  • Maren Koch ,
  • Kathrin Ernst ,
  • Andrea Fichtmüller ,
  • Robin Haring
Julia Balzer
European University of Applied Sciences,

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Andrés Jung
University of Lübeck
Author Profile
Janina Gerhard
Gesellschaft für psychosoziale Einrichtungen gGmbH
Author Profile
Sarah Reinecke
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile
Marco Mijic
Medical Park Reithofpark
Author Profile
Akram Jahja
Activano Medical Fitness GmbH
Author Profile
Marieke Eggert
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile
Maren Koch
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile
Kathrin Ernst
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile
Andrea Fichtmüller
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile
Robin Haring
European University of Applied Sciences
Author Profile

Abstract

i) Rationale, aims and objectives Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a well-known core healthcare competence, but the clinical implementation is complex. To be able to facilitate EBP implementation, valid measurement of the “EBP-status quo” is essential. Therefore, we aimed to identify valid tools for EBP status assessment among health practitioners in Germany. ii) Methods The databases MEDLINE (via Pubmed), Cochrane and PEDro were systematically searched until July 2019, to update a previous review from 2013. Methodological quality and evidence level was scored by two independent raters via: i) COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist, ii) updated criteria for good measurement properties, and iii) modified GRADE criteria. iii) Results Overall, 3.467 studies were identified with 20 different EBP-questionnaires included in 38 studies on EBP tool development and/or validation. Most questionnaires demonstrated moderate or low-quality evidence for the psychometric properties tested. While validity properties (content, structural and cross-cultural) were assessed more frequently, reliability was tested in 20% of the questionnaires and responsiveness in one tool. iv) Conclusion Although a lack of high-quality psychometric properties of EBP-tools became apparent, the “Evidence-Based Practice Inventory” (EBPI) appears to be the best validated and reliable tool for a survey among German health practitioners.