Evidence-Based Practice in Medicine and Healthcare


Medicine and healthcare are amongst the significantly dynamic human fields, and substantial amounts of finances have been spent yearly on refined and quality studies on research, leading to an exponential development in medical writings. Occasionally, innovative and more efficient health services, medicines, and treatments are invented. The primary goal of the approach is to assist practitioners, physicians, and medicinal technicians offer the appropriate treatment and care to the consumers (Grove et al., 2017). Moreover, besides employing traditional and well-developed practices and procedures, healthcare providers are implementing inventive involvements that are centered on best procedures and solid research-centered evidence on diabetes (Brown, 2014). Evidence-based practice is one of such methods and is promptly becoming famous due to its prospective to successfully manage medical concerns and offer improved patient treatment.

Clinical Practice and Problem

The treatment of diabetes has posed significant challenges to medical providers. Depending on the kind of diabetes a patient has, this plays a role in the research that should be conducted to successfully manage the illness. For instance, the treatment of type 1 diabetes involves insulin admission or the utilization of an insulin pump, regular blood sugar analysis, and carbohydrate count (Fitzpatrick, 2010). On the contrary, the treatment of type-2 diabetes usually includes changes in lifestyle, tracking of a patient’s blood sugar, and diabetic medications, such as insulin.

The promotion of evidence-based practice in diabetes necessitates a healthcare infrastructure centered on supporting companies to offer EBP and an education system effective in backing medical practitioners in acquiring EBP competencies. The implementation of EBP on diabetes treatment should therefore be continuously monitored regularly at the point of patient contact (Ganz et al., 2009). The development and implementation of expert training to facilitate EBP on diabetes is thus a primary and immediate challenge in numerous institutions (Grove et al., 2017). Such has been attributed to inadequate training of the physicians to execute EBP practices in their treatment activities offered to patients. Therefore, a momentum for regular enhancement in the EBP training relating to examinations will present directional and structural developments in the field.

Difference between Evidence-Based Practice and Clinical Study

The research, evidence-based practice (EBP), and clinical study support the primary objectives of the Magnet Program and the Magnet Model component of knowledge, invention, and enhancements. The three central goals of the Magnet Recognition Initiative are to improve quality in an environment that backs professional practice and identifying excellence in the presentation of treatment services to consumers (Kenny et al., 2010). The program is also focused on disseminating improved services in the healthcare sector.

Unlike clinical research, EBP is aimed at translating the proof and employing it in clinical decision-making. The determination of EBP is to utilize the evidence present to develop patient-care conclusions. Despite several pieces of evidence stemming from studies, the EBP goes beyond the employment of research and involves medical expertise, patient choices, and values (McEwen & Wills, 2017). Furthermore, the adoption of EBP considers that occasionally the appropriate proof is the view of managers and professionals despite no definitive knowledge from study outcomes occurs (Krom et al., 2010). Whereas research relies on creating innovative insight, EBP comprises innovation linked to discovering and translating the superlative suggestion into medical practice.

On the contrary, the aim of the clinical study is to establish new insight and validate the prevailing knowledge founded on theory. Research comprises systematic, scientific inquiry to respond to particular assessment queries and analyze the hypotheses using rigorous and disciplined techniques (Miller, 2016). Since research entails exploration, examination, and innovation, it further necessitates an appreciation of the philosophy of science (McEwen & Wills, 2017). Therefore, for a clinical research outcome to be reflected as dependable and effective, the scholars should employ scientific techniques in orderly and sequential steps.

Improving the Adoption EBP Practice

With the changing trend in consumer behavior as they incline to manage their own health, the adoption of information technology will help medical practitioners to execute the EBP practices to improve treatment. The clients’ inclination to demanding improved health results will lead to growing demand for better information and tools to back their care choices. Harnessing information technology will advance healthcare services and this can be achieved through three distinct methods. First, medical policy makers should separate improved technological practices from worse methods during implementation (Sligo et al., 2017). For instance, during diagnosis of individuals with diabetic symptoms, the persons should be offered the diabetes medical alert bracelets to help them get warnings on their blood sugar levels. Secondly, during the alteration to IT practices, the changes should be passed down in health practices through various medical institutions (Sligo et al., 2017). The governments and healthcare stakeholders can facilitate this by introducing guidelines on the medical services offered to diabetic patients, such as the introduction of regular insulin tests among consumers in local communities.

Adopting and maintaining evidence based practice programs with fidelity necessitates execution strategies that are structured to tackle multi-level, context-particular limitations and facilitators. Selecting and implementing approaches should be fueled by theory, evidence, and input from specific shareholders. However, the procedures to guide the assortment of EBP in to align with information technology are not well-developed. There is demand for more rigorous techniques for evaluating and prioritizing execution aspects and connecting the adoption of IT strategies to the determinants. The Collaborative Organizational Approach to Selecting and Tailoring Implementation Strategies (COAST-IS) is a program established to help in boost the efficiency of IT implementation in evidence-based practices and its sustainment (Sligo et al., 2017). COAST-IS will enable healthcare institutions administrators and providers to employ intervention mapping to choose and design IT adoption strategies to address their particular functions. The intervention mapping is therefore a multi-step procedure that integrates indication, philosophy, and shareholders perception to ensure that the adoption of EBP is aligned to information technology to effectively tackle the primary aspects of change.


Compared to other fields, the healthcare industry is experiencing significant transformation linked to extensive study and development activities. Since medical practitioners play a substantial part in the delivery of treatment, they should adopt new and inventive methods to offer efficient and improved care to their patients. Similar to past several research works, this assessment has identified a positive attitude amongst physicians towards the evidence-based practice (EBP). On the contrary, it was discovered that numerous institutional and private limitations were deterring nurses from implementing EBP. The hospital administration can address some of the barriers by designing EBP training and offering leaves for medical providers to learn and adopt innovative approaches. Considering that EBP is an information-based process, library and data experts working in the medical institutions can assist in developing elementary information literary capabilities, especially writing searching skills, between nurses and other physicians.


Brown, C. G. (2014). The Iowa Model of Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Quality Care: An Illustrated Example in Oncology Nursing. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 18(2). Web.

Fitzpatrick, J. J. (2010). Connecting or disconnecting the dots between research and evidence-based practice. Applied Nursing Research: ANR, 23(1), 1–1. Web.

Ganz, F. D., Fink, N. F., Raanan, O., Asher, M., Bruttin, M., Nun, M. B., & Benbinishty, J. (2009). ICU nurses’ oral-care practices and the current best evidence. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 41(2), 132–138. Web.

Grove, S. K., Burns, N., & Gray, J. (2012). The practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Kenny, D. J., Richard, M. L., Ceniceros, X., & Blaize, K. (2010). Collaborating across services to advance evidence-based nursing practice. Nursing Research, 59(1), S11–S21.

Krom, Z. R., Batten, J., & Bautista, C. (2010). A unique collaborative nursing evidence-based practice initiative using the Iowa model: A clinical nurse specialist, a health science librarian, and a staff nurse’s success story. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 24(2), 54–59.

McEwen, M., & Wills, E. M. (2017). Theoretical basis for nursing. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Miller, K. M. (2016). Patient Perceptions of the Caring Environment.

Sligo, J., Gauld, R., Roberts, V., & Villa, L. (2017). A literature review for large-scale health information system project planning, implementation and evaluation. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 97, 86–97. Web.

Find out your order's cost