Non-randomized trial demonstrated significant improvements in evidence-based practice competencies among clinical nurses, indicating RPAEP's effectiveness.
Background/Objectives: Evidence-based practice (EBP) remains limited among clinical nurses worldwide, with Korean healthcare settings facing challenges. This study examined the effectiveness of the research practice ability enhancement program (RPAEP) in strengthening evidence-based practice (EBP) competencies among clinical nurses who had completed master’s coursework without a thesis. Methods: A non-randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Korea (June–December 2022). Thirty participants were assigned by convenience sampling to intervention (n = 15) or control (n = 15) groups. The intervention comprised 12 biweekly sessions. The primary outcome was research practice ability (RPA); the secondary outcomes were EBP beliefs (EBPBs), EBP Attitudes (EBPAs), and Nursing Professional Values (NPVs). Analyses employed Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann–Whitney U tests. The qualitative evaluation used thematic analysis of focus group interviews (FGIs) (n = 12). Results: All participants completed the study. The intervention group showed significant improvements in RPA (within-group: Z = −1.96, p = 0.050, ES = 0.82; between-group: t = −2.39, p = 0.016, ES = 1.02) and EBPBs (t = −3.30, p = 0.005, ES = 0.87). NPVs showed significant between-group differences (t = 2.38, p = 0.024, ES = 0.87), while EBPAs remained unchanged. The FGIs revealed three major themes related to participation in the research practice ability enhancement program: “barriers to research practice,” “guidance for research practice,” and “enhancing research practice ability.” Conclusions: The RPAEP enhanced nurses’ EBP competencies despite the non-randomized design. However, single-site implementation and convenience sampling limit generalizability. Sustained EBP integration requires addressing individual and organizational barriers through comprehensive education with institutional commitment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: