Evidence-based radiography: A new methodology or the systematisation of an old practice?

• Autor(a) principal: Abrantes, António
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Ribeiro, Luís Pedro, da Silva, Carlos Alberto, England, A., Azevedo, Kevin Barros, Reis, Mónica
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10174/31421; https://doi.org/Abrantes, A., Ribeiro, L., Silva, C.A., England, A., Azevedo, K., Almeida, R. P. P., & Reis, M. V. (2020). Evidence-based radiography: A new methodology or the systematisation of an old practice?. Radiography, 26(2),127-132. ISSN: 1078-8174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.09.010 PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32052783; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.09.010
• topic: Evidence based radiography; Scientific research; Scientific reading

Introduction: Evidence based radiography (EBR) is the logical development of evidence based practice applied to radiography. The aim of this study was to investigate the opinion of a cohort of Portuguese radiographers in Southern Portugal working in public hospitals regarding evidence based practice (EBP), namely about the levels of knowledge about EBR, how they access information and how they use it within daily practice. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was applied to a sample of 40 radiographers in the Portuguese region of Algarve. This questionnaire was validated for Portuguese speakers using the translation-retranslation method. Results: The final response rate was 69% (40/58). Results suggest that most radiographers trained EBR during their undergraduate training. Although, no statistically significant correlations were found in the practice of EBR against participant gender, age, training, career level, reading papers and workplace. The most frequent reason to read papers is the “interest” to do so, and national professional journals are read more often. It was found that radiographers that read scientific papers more frequently know more about research (p = 0.005), understand the importance of research for the professional activity (p = 0.023), and know more on how to conduct research papers (p = 0.034). Conclusion: EBR within radiography is not yet well established, and radiographers' have varying viewpoints. Radiographers that read scientific papers more frequently understand better the philosophy behind this concept but it is very important to deepen the knowledge on this area. Implications for practice: When practicing radiography based on the best available scientific knowledge, professionals are ensuring the best for patients and for profession. To achieve this, and before taking any action, it is important to evaluate the current situation, and this research presents a way to do so.