Implementation of evidence-based practice by standardized care plans: A study protocol


Background: Patient records should both transfer and create knowledge about patients and their health care. A standardized care plan could be a way to implement evidence-based care directly in practice and improve the documentation in patient records. The aim of this study is to investigate and compare the development and implementation process of a standardized care plan in hospital and primary health care. A further aim is to evaluate the effects on the quality of documentation and the care given in two contexts. Methods and Analysis: Realistic evaluation will be used as a framework to investigate the implementation process. According to this framework, possible contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes in the study will be considered. The study will be performed in two contexts: an orthopedic clinic and primary health care centers. In both contexts, the two key mechanisms will be the same: the implementation process will be driven by internal facilitators (practitioners at the units) and the process will be guided by the Rules and Regulations for interoperability in the Health and Social Care specification, “National information structure for standardized care plans”. Two outcomes of the study will be studied: to investigate the development and implementation process by an evaluation of fidelity and to evaluate how a standardized care plan affects the quality of documentation and the use of evidence-based care. Discussion: Implementation of the SCP will probably meet the same resistance as implementation of guidelines. Documentation of care is an important but resource-consuming requirement in health care, a more standardized method of documenting is requested by health professionals. This project can provide insight into the complex process of developing and implement an SCP in different contexts, which will be useful in further implementation processes.

Share and Cite:

Jansson, I. and Törnvall, E. (2013) Implementation of evidence-based practice by standardized care plans: A study protocol. Open Journal of Nursing, 3, 51-57. doi: 10.4236/ojn.2013.38A007.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Estabrooks, C.A., Floyd, J.A., O’Leary, K.A. and Gushta, M. (2003) Individual determinants of research utilization: a systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 43, 506-520.
[2] Carlson, C.L. and Plonczynski, J. (2008) Has the BARRIERS Scale changed nursing practice? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 63, 322-333.
[3] Squires, J.E., Hutcinson, A.M., Boström, A.-M., O’Rouke, H.M., Cobban, S.J. and Estabrooks, C.A. (2011) To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review. Implementation Science, 6, 21.
[4] Thomas, L.H., Cullum, N.A., McColl, E., Rousseau, N. and Steen, N. (2000) Guidelines in professions allied to medicine (review). The Cochrane Library.
[5] Natsch, S. and van der Meer, J.W.M. (2003) The role of clinical guidelines, policies and stewardship. Journal of Hospital Infection, 53, 172-176.
[6] Gooch, P. and Roudsari, A. (2011) Computerization of workflows, guidelines, and care pathways: A review of implementation challenges for process-oriented health information systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18, 738-748.
[7] Grol, R. and Grimshaw, J. (2003) From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet, 362, 1225-1230.
[8] Conrad, D. and Stocker Sneider, J. (2011) Enhancing the visibility of NP practice in electronic health records. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 7, 832-838.
[9] Wang, N., Hailey, D. and Yu, P. (2011) Quality of nursing documentation and approaches to its evaluation: A mixed-method systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67, 1858-1875.
[10] RIV (2011) RIV-Specifikation Nationell informationsstruktur för standardiserade vårdplaner [RIV specification —National information infrastructure for standardized care plans].
[11] De Bleser, L., Depreitere, R., de Waele, K., Vanhaecht, K., Vlayen, J. and Sermeus, W. (2006) Defining Pathways. Journal of Nursing Management, 14, 553-563.
[12] Kinsman, L., Rotter, T., James, E., Snow, P. and Willis, J. (2010) What is clinical pathway? Development of a definition to inform the debate. BMC Medicine, 8, 31.
[13] Social Department (2010) Nationella eHälso-strategin [National strategy for eHealth].
[14] Dahm, M.F. and Wadensten, B. (2008) Nurses’ experiences of and opinions about using standardized care plans in electronic health records—A questionnaire study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17, 2137-2145.
[15] Jansson, I., Bahtsevani, C., Pilhammar, E. and Forsberg, A. (2010) Factors and conditions that influence the implementation of standardized nursing care plans. Open Journal of Nursing, 4, 25-34.
[16] Lee, T.-T. and Chang, P.-C. (2004) Standardized care plans: Experiences of nurses in Taiwan. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 33-40.
[17] Pöder, U., Fogelberg-Dahm, M. and Wadensten, B. (2011) Implementation of a multi-professional standardized careplan in electronic health records for the care of stroke patients. Journal of Nursing Management, 19, 810-819.
[18] Vanhaecht, K., De Witte, K., Panelle, M. and Sermeus, W. (2009) Do pathways lead to better organized care processes? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15, 782-788.
[19] Hunter, B. and Segrott, J. (2008) Re-mapping client journeys and professional identities: A review of the literature on clinical pathways. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 608-635.
[20] Matland, R.E. (1995) Synthesizing the implementation literature: The ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation. J-PART, 5, 145-174.
[21] Pawson, R. and Tilly, N. (1997) Realistic Evaluation. Sage Publications, London.
[22] Pommier, J., Guével, M.-R. and Jourdan, D. (2010) Evaluation of health promotion in schools: A realistic evaluation approach using mixed methods. BMC Public Health, 10, 43.
[23] Wilson, V. and McCormack, B. (2006) Critical realism as emancipatory action: The case for realistic evaluation in practice development. Nursing Philosophy, 7, 45-57.
[24] Wand, T., White, K. and Patching, J. (2011) Realistic evaluation of an emergency department-based mental health nurse practitioner outpatient service in Australia. Nursing & Health Sciences, 13, 199-206.
[25] Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J. and Balain, S. (2007) A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2, 40.
[26] Williams, L., Burton, C. and Rycroft-Malone, J. (2012) What works: A realist evaluation case study of intermediaries in infection control practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69, 915-926.
[27] Winter, R. and Munn-Giddings, C. (2001) A Handbook for Action Research in Health and Social Care. Routledge, London.
[28] McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J. (2011) All You Need to Know About Action Research. 2nd Edition, Sage Publications, London.
[29] Rycroft-Malone, J., Kitson, A., Harvey, G., McCormack, B., Seers, K., Tichen, A. and Eastbrooks, C. (2002) Ingredients for changes: Revisting a conceptual model. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 11, 174-180.
[30] Bahtsevani, C., Khalaf, A., Willman, A. and Östman, M. (2008) Developing an instrument for evaluating implementation of clinical practice guidelines: A test-retest study. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 14, 839-846.
[31] Charmaz, K. (2005) Grounded theory in the 21st century. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., Eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research, The Sage, London, Chapter 20.
[32] Hsieh, H.-F. and Shannon, S.E. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288.
[33] World Medical Association (2003) Declaration of Helsinki. In The Swedish Research Council’s Guidelines for the Ethical Evaluation of Medical Research on Humans. Medicinska forskningsrådet (MFR), Stockholm, 99-104.
[34] SFS (2003) Lag om etikprövning av forskning som avser människor [Act on the Ethical Review of Research Involving Humans]. Socialdepartementet. Stockholm, 460.
[35] Gabbay, J. and le May, A. (2004) Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed “mindlines”? Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ, 329, 1013.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.