Psychometric properties of questionnaires to assess evidence-based practice among occupational, physical and speech therapists: A systematic review

Julia Balzer; Andrés Jung; Janina Gerhard; Sarah Reinecke; Marko Mijic; Andrea Fichtmüller; Akram Jahjah; Marieke Eggert; Maren Koch; Kathrin Ernst; Robin Haring

doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2022.11.003

Psychometric properties of questionnaires to assess evidence-based practice among occupational, physical and speech therapists: A systematic review

Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2023 Feb:176:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.11.003. Epub 2023 Jan 24.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ European University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Applied Public Health, Rostock, Germany.
² Universität zu Lübeck, Institute of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy, Pain and Exercise Research Luebeck (P.E.R.L), Lübeck, Germany. Electronic address: andres.jung@posteo.de.
³ Gesellschaft für psychosoziale Einrichtungen gGmbH, Mainz, Germany.
⁴ Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Friedrich-Baur-Institut / Neurologische Klinik und Poliklinik, LMU Klinikum, Munich, Germany.
⁵ Activano Medical Fitness GmbH, Hanau, Germany.

PMID: 36702639
DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.11.003

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an important aspect of healthcare work, 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 occupational, physical and speech therapists in Germany.

Methods: The databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were systematically searched from August 2011 until July 2022. Methodological quality and evidence level were scored by two independent raters via: i) the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist, ii) updated criteria for good measurement properties, and iii) modified GRADE criteria.

Results: Overall, 57 reports describing the development or validation of 31 EBP questionnaires were included. Six questionnaires showed "sufficient" evidence for content validity, three questionnaires showed "sufficient" evidence for reliability, two questionnaires showed "sufficient" evidence for structural validity as well as internal consistency, and nine questionnaires showed "sufficient" evidence for construct validity. Most questionnaires demonstrated moderate or low-quality evidence for the psychometric properties tested.

Discussion: Overall, the present review found a lack of sufficient evidence on the psychometric properties of most questionnaires. The Evidence-Based Practice Inventory (EBPI), the Evidence-based Practice Confidence (EPIC) scale and the Health Sciences-Evidence-Based Practice (HS-EBP) questionnaire were the only questionnaires with "sufficient" content validity and, in addition, "sufficient" reliability or "sufficient" internal consistency.

Conclusion: Although a lack of high-quality psychometric properties of EBP tools became apparent, the EBPI, the EPIC scale and the HS-EBP questionnaire currently appear to be the best validated tools to assess EBP behavior/attitude and implementation in occupational, physical and speech therapists.

Keywords: Ergotherapie; Evidence-based practice; Evidenzbasierte Praxis; Gesundheitsfachberufe; Health practitioners; Logopädie; Occupational therapy; Physical therapy; Physiotherapie; Speech therapy; Validity; Validität.

Publication types

Systematic Review
Review

MeSH terms

Evidence-Based Practice*
Germany
Humans
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Speech*
Surveys and Questionnaires